good morning thank your honor morning you'll have you have as you know four minutes and then two minutes and in rebuttal and your adversaries who each have three minutes  please proceed sir yes so your honor this is a civil rights case where in as an african american i was my but my rights were violated so to begin with i was arrested in my home based on order protection which is a interment of the state this was no warrant was established so i'm relying on the case of peyton versus new york where this court rules that without a warrant and there is no cause for an arrest now there's not a probable cause issue because an order protection to remove me from my house could never result in a warrant because that would violate my fourth amendment so the district court did not review this under the standard so i'm asking this court to review that based on your own ruling of being arrested in my own home based on an instrument from the from state which would have never amounted to a warrant you understand that sir that what we need to do as a matter of course as a court is to establish whether we have disposition of the of your pending request to amend your complaint bro it's my opinion your honour's my opinion that that issue is a closed issue just based on the rule of this court it's a warrant list arrest whether the district court decide t matter a don't know decide the mother this court has jurisdiction for that for that case because it is you have to determine you know you have to show that the court below has conclusively determine all the pending claims of all the parties to the litigation before i can come up to us properly on on appeal you know i think they have established that it is closed issue because they're arguing qualified immunity for every single person in this case so therefore the issue is close on that court because they're going to rest on that argument so therefore i'm asking this court to review the entire case based on those qualified me as a close issue so i'm asking this court to review the this as a as a close final issue on a also want to ask the court that bs that these are procedural issues that because i'm a pro se procedural issues should not defeat my opportunity to come before this court to plead like my case for review under constitutional issues so course  it will it's a question of timing right whether you can plead your issues to the court now or whether it has to be after all the issues are resolved completely by the district court i gather here that when the order came out dismissing your your claims the judgment was issued to you with a notice saying here's how you appeal the right correct circuit and you follow that and then once the your court acted on your letter saying here's what i want to argue with respect in the now the district judge said i'll hear that once you come back from appeal so you hear if not nothing you could have done differently  in that context that writes the context as it was a closed issue no matter what i do and even if it were to go back to the lower court it's going to be so narrow that the only argument i have is it's a warrantless arrests this court has already made that decision and p york there's really nothing more to decide it's either it was a violation or not a violation so to me this court can review that just based on that basis and i followed the the appeal process that says if the case is finalized even based on a warrantless arrest that is grounds for an appeal without even looking at the underlying issues it's it's clear that it's it file letter make facts with respect to your your man al claim your municipal liability claim that the district court has an  act i wrote a letter after is but i was referencing that the facts already exist in the appendix appendix a pending be impending see that clearly states no warrant was for the arrest it was an instrument that cannot supersede a warrant it's already in there so report is right there the police report it says you cannot arrest someone if they're in the database as a victim of domestic violence so i point to the court that how could you overlook these instruments to say there's not enough reasonable cause why this cannot be appealed it doesn't make sense the evidence is right there i should have not been arrested three weeks after completing a domestic violence report barring the fact that you could not get a warrant to remove me from my house from any judge in any court york the threshold issue as we stated our letter this court lacks jurisdiction under two section twelve ninety one because of the sequence of events in the district court's orders and  plaintiffs letter and then subsequent filing of a notice of appeal because of that we recommend we seek limited remain and for the district court to resolve the issue of plaintiff's letter and then that will conclusively resolve all the issues in this appeal and then this court will have jurisdiction to hear it though so that that h would be able to appeal to this court but what's required in your view is a final determination by the district court of the remaining matters that's correct because the district court did have the authority under rule sixty sixty two point one to indicate what its ruling would be on plaintiff's request to amend the complaint but a fair reading of the district court orders reveals that the district court deferred consideration pending this appeal and it would be inefficient for this court to resolve the matter now potentially have the district court re evaluate mon el claims and it's not a deficiency question right no it's correct yeah the jurisdictional it's a tricky part efficient probably if efficiency is would be  resolving a right now but because it's a complete bar the jurisdiction this court cannot hear the appeal right now i'm happy to address the merits briefly if the court would like but otherwise i will rest if there are no questions morning your honor is partner graves poller from the new york city law department for the city of belize as set forth in our letter already submitted to the court we agree with the arguments for non finale that the state defendants have presented just wan focus on one additional point about the futility because that's the issue that's outstanding the the court entered its or issued a decision on july fifth dismissing mr his complaint and the judgment that was subsequently entered docketed the motion to dismiss order but didn't fully capture the district court's resolution of mr ijaz request for leave to amend the opinion made very clear there with respect to all of the claims that were time barred or barred by the record feldman doctrine which encompassed almost all of the complaint that futility that the allowing leave to amend would be still an open question sorry the open question is whether or not mr h will be able to amend with respect to that issue and then once that is resolved he can you know potentially proceed but that futility question is is what's been left open and he can proceed on all the issues that were previously decided by the district he can proceed on all good and any new resolution of amendment and in less or any other questions  submissions thank your honor i rely on the case that the state laws which is people versus novak where the issue of whether or not a case is close in terms of a narrow issue or whether a judge could review it says it's a statutory it is a constitutional question whether or not a case is closed based on a warrantless arrest whether i go back to a lower court or not that question will still go back before you because the argument is still case even without the merits without a warrant it cannot be  regardless of immunity regards a probable cause is it an award was the rest is a close issue for this court therefore you have jurisdiction over this matter and all matters that's in this or in my opinion it is a final order th question's going to come back to this court is it constitutional for youthful to resume my home the answer for any court under paid versus new york from this district is yes i don't need to go back and get that written up in an order why you why you justices cannot review the case at all the case based on just that fact alone it will come back here because i will bring it back here on to that pretense that you do have jurisdiction over this case even if there is a minor point left you can make the term nation i'm willing to take whatever decision you make based on that because if i go back it's going to be so limited it's not even worth even submission we will adjourn court just as a housekeeping matter are there pretty law and why you students here ok if you stay here michael jordan will be coming out he's our general counsel to the court and chief operating officer so just sit tight and he'll be he'll be out in a few minutes thank you