and the time that this was going on ninety days had not expect that it was just the couple of week or so after the the right to sue had been granted so that was discretion not to sanction the other side for doing certain things that represent the mirror image of what your client did you maybe your uming against yourself you could end up like the fly the concord the fly paper my name is chris forget which i represent the defendant's appellate and i don't know how more simple to say it than i didn't do it on the underlying sanctions motion the appellant accuses myself my firm in my clients of entering into a private agreement with the equal employment opportunity commission to prevent the appellant from obtaining a copy of her charge from that simply did not happen in order to attain sanctions pursuant to twenty eight u s c nine hundred twenty seven there must be clear evidence conduct is my reply declaration that i submitted in connection with the underlying motion the seal that proof that term very loosely is not clear evidence of any private agreement with what is it shown it shall tell you what it shows your it's our position and we did not submit any hipaa protected information to the scene there's nothing in the record to suggest that we did and frankly the sanctions motion in the only action had nothing to do with the submission of hipaa protected information and that everything to do with this quote unquote private agreement to prevent the appalling from getting her charged file my clients were concerned about submitting certain information to the sea because they did not want it open to the public so i called the investigator john douglas on the member fourth two thousand and fourteen  is the stuff in the usual course open to the public eye that's my understanding and my understanding the time was that the information would only be permitted on pursuant to a for a request to the parties to the charge and that was what i was taught my client was concerned about that they don't want to take my word for it they want to me to get confirmation from the o c so i spoke with the just the e e o c investigator and the e e o c investigator told me that they would only release information in response to a four request under two circumstances one if the underlying claims and of discrimination were in litigation and two it would only be released to the parties or their legal representatives i never entered in any agreement i don't ask for an agreement i would never do such a thing it's it would be saying civil conflict i would not ever do that what is represented in my reply declaration is simply what the e e o c investigator told me under what circumstances they would release and he o c charge file i never entered into any private agreement with the c i do not know kevin barry who is the head of the district office of the u c of which claims i had this private agreement i never spoke with him i never communicated with him there simply put there was never any agreement there is no evidence to that that's why the district court found that the appellant's cross motion for sanctions was wholly unsupported it pending sanctions motion where we are still waiting on attorney fees i think of the mayor case which was cited in the order that you directed that there were co op across motions for attorney's fees so they view that as a separate judicial