quote all of the evidence used in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs overwhelmingly favors the defendant is no contrary very consistent respectfully this was where our supreme court has counsel that minds may differ regarding the entrances of the evidence in this case as to the evidence in this case as to whether there was an agreement to conspire to suppress information regarding the harmful effects of the public and workers who come in contact with over a hundred and forty jerkers of the eleven judicial circuit found there was enough evidence of a conspiracy seven justices of this court have also found the evidence to support the jury vote this is not just an isolated case where a judge needed to intervene and se addition to our supreme court reporter found in there that there was a parallel action based upon the evidence that the jury could clued based on parallel evidence alone that there was sufficient mcclure in the various cases i referenced earlier we have learned that there were a number of additional contacts with the companies that relate to buy in selling these products the conspiracy to suppress  is no i mean while at johns manville had the other issue involved in suppressing this information made this public and had a campaign about warning workers who would come in contact with this it might  or they say having overlapping direct ships is not enough but what this jury here properly was to consider all of these facts so all of this was all the parallel know believe this or sad or garmo that they may have been doing it to save their own skin but they may have done the right thing for the wrong reasons and i would and that's why all these jurors an eleventh circuit have come up with the same lucian based upon evidence and as a matter of fact the evidence is stronger in each case with but again when i was in there is if you take all of those instances where they were concerned internally that studies would be a backers whether the the more they became aware of this fact isn't that hard to believe that the more they didn't talk about it with their suppliers or their purchasers of their products or m contacts how can a jury clue that what they discussed or those contact and they had the wrong reasons for just almost accidentally doing the right thing if you believe that there wasn't enough scientific evidence of a sense why i couldn't a jury look at that same issue in light would again yes this court to reconsider some of its recent decisions in life the different facts and circumstances in this case and the light of the there really is a dispute as to whether nothing ever this is presented this at this sphere or c would be the certified this opinion to the supreme court of the three sixteen and let them deal with it again that's one option but not that i'm aware of in terms of those are exactly the types of categories of evidence this works feel is leading insufficient evidence of conspiracy so the same result should apply in this case contrary to the arguments that i see private standard one of the christmas it comes out of that standard is innocent construction so if you have conduct it is equally susceptible of a non conspiratorial reason even if it's self interest then that is not very convincing evidence of conspiracy and jury verdict it's based on today is insufficient as a matter of law and that as a result judgment for honeywell has been appropriate so what i'd like to do just very briefly is touch upon the very few items of additional evidence that were clear and convincing evidence this which is required given the circumstantial nature of the evidence that honeywell did facts enter into a conspiracy as a latch the additional evidence as put forth in the breeze for your hon s is very limited and i will echo counsel's words when he indicated that it's overwhelmingly the same evidence that has been before the court with only minor variations and even within those variations the evidence falls within the exact same categories of evidence that this court has already rejected first with regard to purchase orders poets console and a vax counsel pope talked about purchase orders normal business relationships normal business activity packing or as the court found in her dorm all even in exclusive supplier relationship is insufficient evidence to find an inference or support in terms of conspiracy and certainly any new evidence currently before this panel of a relationship a purchaser supplier business relationship between honeywell and any other company alleged osha conduct in again echoing mr simpson for apex the dates of exposure a very important in this case contrary to posing council's position that you know the importance of that is that later in expose mr rate mr simms and went through those matters for you and i won't expound on those further other than to say the post osha or is certainly the post emergency standard activity undertaken by honeywell and its predecessor normally you are not going to put down conspiracy in writing respectfully how any sort of lay opinion that does nothing more than actually repeat and reaffirm what the law has already found which is that your sel the other evidence that point that offers no it's not awkward just simply of the same type that we've seen and indeed there will always be a slightly different exhibit a slightly different piece of evidence that would demonstrate parallel conduct a slightly different way that was demonstrated that is not his counsel suggests a reason to say well the parallel on the evidence is stronger so therefore the jury's verdict should it's rational he's in a situation like this where we know it all annoying manufacturers are not responsible warm risks posed by products sold by other companies is appropriate to it certainly is not bound by her it's because we don't have a box system where one indeed speaks for the entire court and when you do the head count taking rule twenty three orders this circumstantial evidence and say it doesn't amount to that spirity think that part of that part of the that this jury was instructed to look at all of the evidence all of the