you may begin any time or referenced by the government complains that certain ebay fees were incurred to lobbying their client for example discussions with the contract a new contract an officer and then the regional director of the bureau made thus far in other words b s or these outside what's called lobby seem to me in the brief you're at least suggesting that i was a little confused by this that even if you do that there's some chunk of money left that constitute that was really actual litigation asked but i don't could you just tell me just generally one with those fees that you call actually litigation with a pre nine hundred ninety or pre one nine hundred eighty nine in connection with trying to pursue the record is that the board did not award fees for the pipe a plane because the board thought that the fees were not reasonably incurred and had caused marshall to substantially delay the litigation by spending twelve years pursuing the for cutting it off in nineteen eighty nine it seems to me pre nine hundred eighty nine one could argue it was kind of a hensley alternative theory case but it seems to me it's much harder to do that after one thousand nine hundred nine because the board made clear that this is a waste of time to pursue this and under our abuse of discretion review the boy could have reasonably said that those fees were unreasonable so is there in real money are we talking about anything real  if we cut it off in one nine hundred eighty nine do you have enough on the record to establish that there were fees after the current actual litigation with the state and what portion i mean you said this is we're all talking about like one hundred fifty thousand dollars here right or i'm having a hard time frankly saying that this doesn't doesn't apply i mean there were two point two bases that they originally and there are two bases in which they lack that they should have they should get relief from the government they person necessarily we do a lot of patent cases carefully and so if you know anything about patents i mean let's assume we've got and let's assume agent would apply here as well or hensley would apply at least if you've got an invalid a decline i mean you want to you're in an alleged infringe and you want to prevail you want to get out of this you allege one that you're not infringing or alternatively that the patent is invalid would you say and or hensley that if you win on one of those theories you can get litigation agencies  interviews but you may go but if you're pursuing one claim you may be asking for expenses for fourteen things which you welcome that we lose but you would still get attorney's fees for that if you pursue prevailed with the bulk of those right i mean apologize if you've already covered this but i think you refer to pages six and nine what i'm interested in seems to me i can't find we're on the slobby expense issue that we've been talking about on the hensley issue where the board really addressed that seemed to me meeting the board opinion that they talk about lobbying expenses that they were really talking about the senator packwood stuff and so and none of that basis they did not the amount i don't see anything where the board really d because they were incurred they underline before the form it's and was in the wrong for so it seems that the board exclusively was talking about the true lobbying expenses right theories but you can't pursue theories that lack merit greed greed and if we look at the board's decision here and extrapolate i my concern is that the board did not  state in the reading the reasons it's put the precise reason for excluding the the five four category of fees but what i can conclude about extrapolating is that the board thought that that theory delayed the case