sister is in the best case that's position in the district court to argue whether or not he got everything in the other case that he's asking for in this case now i repeat is there any difference between the  and that was not in the excerpts of record and in the other case so i don't really know what it says i know what the district court said but i certainly was curious to look at that document and see if it if it went as far as the district co question of law as as a real loop a case to a vote to convert the action and avoid the exhaustion bar there's no dispute that the exhaustion doesn't apply to remove a case that's properly exhausted that's a separate question and i think the answer which from what i  proceeding on in this case that that the court can satisfactorily answer that question particularly without mr von strikes input in both cases and whatever fact finding might be necessary at the district court level it may be that this case goes going i think if you look at all the documents beared length is probably mentioned at some point so i'm not sure if it's mentioned exactly in the petition i know that credits that impacted his  exhaustion argument i think exhaustion is kind of a unique question of law because it's one that's imposed on the courts to a sponsor the attorney general doesn't even have to raise exhaustion but before the court has to serve the principles of comity and federalis pleadings and say is this a case that for purposes of comedy and federalism had to go through state court review and be properly exhausted in that way or is there some other cause of action which is being alleged here which there surely is in the petition that either is not  case that we cite makes it clear that in in a real live action the mayweather is case the court is entitled to remedy that by restoring credits even though typically restoration credits or denial of good time credits is an action that is it's at least before we loop it was an act it was typically brought in havey a spot where you have a specific cause of action alleging violation of religious freedoms that resulted in a loss of credits the court has that has a coextensive and perhaps even a greater obligation or power to remedy so it's not like we're asking you to do something in another form jumping jumping the gun that should have been done somewhere confess that i'm not aware of the particulars really case yes your honor that makes no sense at all i wasn't aware of the case until i saw a motion to hasn't tried mary yes mr say is that was assigned to a different deputy i did call that deputy and so all i know is from what i've spoken to that person i don't have any firsthand knowledge of that case but i'm certainly prepared to talk about the case that is as far as converting it this is this was not done at the trial court had this been a motion in the district court that mr vance i should ask to convert this to in our loop the case and certainly things would have happened differently  the first that i heard of this contention was in the brief and that's one of my main points is this was not brought in the court below there was no application major the district court to convert this to an r look at the case this  around and that's what i was trying to find out that i cannot represent to you from my reading of the case it appears to involve similar issues america normally out my understanding and i would research it if the court wishes but my understanding is that the case that is this mr failure to exhaust is dismissed without prejudice  how many cases in all of history have floating around now you've mentioned one other is there more than that i don't know that any others on this particular issue i think counsel is not incorrect that he has filed various issues or two cases the court asked if there was a beard klaidman mr in the current case that i'm on i took a look at the petition i just that's the only thing i just reviewed while i was sitting there the petition refers to grooming