generally as the supreme court held in the bridge case a person can be injured by a pattern of mail fraud even if he did not have a lie on or receive any worse representations and none of the defendants have addressed or distinguish this is there anything in the complaint that you can point to to show that he went through with the with the tax treatment that it's playing alleged was marketed to him but that you actually went through with the tax tre went through with the transaction for including pretext reporting purposes in the same way seems pretty conspicuous to me well your honor i think he was damaged by spending over a one million dollars and professional fees for a tax scheme that the options which are contributed to the partnership in order to justify the economic substance of it son of a boss transaction there had to be an independent profit motive for those options sales and because there were misrepresentation transaction which predated our transaction he was provided with i'm not saying that they didn't seek out mr for mr taylor specifically you just said they sought him out because he was engaged after because they knew that they were there generally maybe but i'm following up on your specific statement that the defendants here specifically sought out mr taylor because they knew that what impact this criminal convictions took place here that we should be able to draw a reasonable inference and you do have ninety here on top of that they specifically sought him out because he was  certainly and the question that i have is and you can correct me if i'm wrong but an impression from reading through the complaint is you're not only focused on the oak strategy but you you gain particular focus is enough similarity relational you know similarity to the ok strategy to fairly consider that part of the town and i don't i mean because i would the only reason i ask it that way is because i think it doesn't surprise me at all that banks and law firms and companies in the like are out mark i mean a whole series of you know tax shelters but those tax shelters enterprise wouldn't provide different tax shelters to different investors based on their individual needs ok so then are we looking at it from the from that would you want to think about it from the pattern or from the enterprise the in point that affectively the closely held corporations are frequently a source of tax shelters it would need to be a large income event that you would want to work i don't mean that i'm putting on the spot here but can you think of any allegations in your complaint that i did not describe the individual steps of the rowing transaction in the same detail as we did the right but your point just from the complaint you kind of incorporated the substance of it by reference by because we can go look at the i r s notices  however when we're talking about the morgan test and one of the factors of the board and being the number of victims to be a victim of a particular alleged  and with respect to the other investors they're not and i think they're they're kind of i'm definitely not in that these are extremely sophisticated tax shelter investors and to not be able to make that allegation very telling you no difference or not only that i know i have a short period of time left i do want to touch you have no time left but what else do you want to write only only and that's out of the state law happen to be collateralized by the new school bond account so the defendant there argued well there is a connection with securities because there was a pledge of securities to secure the loan that was part turn the legislation on its head by saying because this was intended to be so broadly protective of investors this is going to be our shield against these fraud claim closely related contacts well your honor i got it as a part of the up or the flip side of that is since you do have a remedy under the securities actually because it is in connection with that you should not be permitted so we're going to offense in terms of the other victims as require we think there is proper notice for them to be identified as other victims of this scheme and we think that the allegations are the reason they were able to avoid the capital gains tax you know you need to have to kick back no you need to do every single step identified in the process in order to get the tax benefit that's not true it was an element of that this shelter was marketed there's no question you allege to use the mail and wire in connection with it and you have some particulars in there with respect to dates of communications but then what happened if you go from you get into one par the arizona relied upon that and we think that that is absolutely sufficient and if you look at the man the allegations are even more specific than that with respect to mr kerik they're more specific than that we have it these two other victims where there are