test is request it is time to request that the split test must be must be done and this whole appeal rests on that the the plane of detained request  comply with the o t regulations is sufficient to avoid summary judgment without a do sing evidence on the other essential elements of his race discrimination and if there is no private right about action for a violation of  regulations under the statute and under case law mr turner was tested on the first day of an orientation the specimens collected by an independent sort of collection agency sent to an independent certified laboratory met talks laboratory and my client had no involvement in the that the collection of the testing they never touched the specimen they wanted it was never in their possession on the day of the graduation from the orientation mr positive absent a negative test my client could not hire mr turner as a driver that would be prohibited by federal law mr turner testified and because it's in the record that he did not request put specimen testing when he talked to the medical review officer mr weingarten of the designate employee representative actually called in mr turner to explain to him the right of a split specimen just to make sure he understood that it's also und not the employer does not provide that they that someone can change their mind but of course mr turner said he never asked in the first place it is fair that mr weingarten after speaking with mr turner's said he understood that mr  conspiracy there is no evidence there is also no evidence and i would think between this conversation and the disqualification what was not of to spin the record or during the course of the discovery any doubt about the testing itself there is no evidence that the testing is unreliable the split specimens frequently fail to reconfirm that there was anything wrong with the bed not text the record is  completely void which would be pure speculation of any causation because if the split specimen had been done and reconfirm there would have been no change and we believe that absent any evidence of causation  that's the first there are then there's a disputed conversation about racial animus there is undisputed conversation that mr turner said that if this m r o was involved who had hung up on also undisputed that he didn't want him involved different independent laboratory and that's all there was there was no evidence about reliability or anything like that so unless you have any other questions we feel that the grant of summary judgment by the just record go on the record before the district court with what's proper i believe it's in the briefs i'm not sure exactly where but the the company is responsible for the actions of the m r o and if that is part of the a part of the part of the rules of the part of the transportation can give you the site i don't have the site handy but it is it is i but i believe it's in the bricks did did mr turner testify that he did not ask the m r o for us with us i believe that is absolutely incorrect that the the record is devoid of causation of an invalid test having been done but the case what's the the problem becomes how does a plaintive get access to whether or not the test was indelibly done and the fact is he does not have access to that and so i think the courts have to have in this state have said that if the d are if the if the department transportation rules