no we're familiar with your cases we've read your briefs the authority cited in your priests and we've looked at least portions of the record and in the limited time that is available to you this morning is should feel free to go straight to the heart of your argument in the event that you're not able to reach some initiate that you briefed that doesn't mean that it is in any way for fear that it will still be under submission we will probably have some questions this morning be mindful of the clock if you're answering a question from the court and makes ours feel free to finish your answer to  you your honor if it please the court opposing counsel good morning my name is fletcher picard represent mister traitor and i represent him below as well in this case mister traitor had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the kick cellular phone records which the government obtained from the company kick kick is a cellular phone application which only runs on cellular phones so all of its records are cellular phone records mister traitor had a reasonable expectation in the privacy of that location information and that reasonable expectation has been recognized and validated by the united states supreme court in the carpenter case more importantly mister traitor had a reasonable expectation in the privacy of his own home which was invaded by the government's surveillance in this case that right as we as we know was established in the cases of united states versus  versus united states many many years ago this case is a hybrid if you will of of sorts carpenter addresses the  cell phone records in the hands of a rd party provider in this case kick and recognizes that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in those records but it's a hybrid because it also and perhaps more importantly concerns the monitoring of mister traders activities in his home over a thirty day period through obtaining these records whe concert business records than the cell site location records let me respond in in two parts your honor the st is the whole gist of getting the records from by law enforcement was to obtain mister traders locations and to monitor his locations ip addresses go directly to a location  in a in in the case of a cell phone a cell phone either uses a wireless network or it uses a cell tower to communicate with however it its intended  so st of all those records are not incidentally linked to location those records are inherently make to a location but but also just as important when women when one reads the carpenter case carefully  justice roberts has a very i think important quote in there where he says it page two thousand two hundred and twenty virtually any activity on the phone generates c s ally which is sell site location information including incoming calls texts or emails and countless other data connections a phone automatically makes when checking for a news weather or social media updates and that is exactly what we are talking about here your honor we are talking about a strictly cellular phone application networks isn't that right i mean there are in reality there are other ways i mean st of all the person doesn't need to take the phone well i'm ok but secondly we have a whole new generation now phones which are just what we call pay pay for minutes phones which are not trackable to any individual so so in essence there is a whole new so here technology now which and right well that's a no sir kick is a two way application so he certainly can he certainly can contact the application himself from his cell phone but once somebody installs the kik app just like any app that you might have on your phone whether it's whether it's who go or or whatever it is that app will also seek to to contact you and provide you with information the way that the way that the system works these companies are very aggressive about trying to get push information to the user as well as receive contact from the user many of these applications address was there if he had not installed the app that would not be sir i know i'm asking if he didn't use it no there there still would be so for instance it stays open for practical purposes so once i install the app on my phone other people from throughout the network the kick network and send me messages kids will then seek out my phone and they will provide me with one of the problems that we have in this case is we don't have a an evidentiary record which would answer your question your honor and i am certainly not an expert i believe but is there anything in this record that would suggest that if we didn't use the app in the sense that i'm talking about turning it on there would be no ip address that would be correct within that i can't i can't and i would be overstepping my technical expertise try to answer that i believe have a judge that if kicks sends you a message yes there is a record of that ip address because the the the service locates you and then provide you with that message let me ask you a slightly different question in your reply brief you said that there were five hundred and ninety three loggins four hundred and thirteen of them from mister traders home and one hundred and eighty while he was outside of this call from his phone to data connection or a mobile hotspot there was no cite for that where does that come from your honor that was those are facts that was alleged in my motion to suppress the court did not grant me an evidentiary hearing so i don't have i was not able to place those documents and evidence so there was no affidavit or was not the declaration that would ever contain that information so those were strictly allegations that i mean it was provided in discovery your honor that's where i have taken the information from a location that it created a map of the individual entire daily life here that would not be the case what is the ip address would only show where the defendant access the application no more no less with that be an accurate statement no sir no sir because simply that and you know volume is certainly not the question under carpenter but however here we do have a lot of volume and so for thirty continuing days one force that was able to monitor mister traitorous activities within his own home all details inside the home are intimate details and they are not the business of law enforcement or the government in general found that the collection of cell site location information was so great and of such magnitude that it chronicled the detail of movements as your honor stated a people pass movement and potential future movement in ways that technology had never seen before and that chronicling of this information was done without any active participation of the person who carried the phone as your honour's probably have near you or beside you everyone here has a cellphone or more cell phones in this country than there are people unless someone uses a cell phone with regard to an application or a website and ip address and judge marcus know what it would not be generated this is vastly different than cell site location information unless like the chief prior indicated unless you leave the network unless you turn off the phone cell site location information is consistently generated if the phone is on and someone is receiving a phone call or a text message whether you pick up apple call or whether you receive i answer that text message that there is going to be a cell fight location information that happens or it found that because of this passive collection of information there needed to be some protection and found that the rd party doctrine didn't apply whereas in this instance the rd party doctrine clearly applies to the records of teams psychic in this instance because the judge marcus indicated five indicate that somehow the case application is running on the phone but that is not that defies logic in that if you operate a phone there are certain but and that you could post a question on the phone that allows the application to remain open allows you to remain on but again it is the affirmative act of an individual that allows that to happen and that is what happened in this case the appellant cannot claim that the information that he turned over to kick to use this application was somehow if not turned over voluntarily he used his e mail address he used a username he logged on so there is information in this record that shows that he voluntarily disclosed society he used to sell phones are pervasive in our society again your honour's probably have your cell phones right next to you all i would venture to guess that neither or anyone on this doom advocate application i would be true would it not pages of a string of numbers that in and of itself provide no information has to kick records provided location information then the agent in this case would not have had to done an ip registry search to find out who was the internet service provider they would not have had to serve an emergency disclosure request on contact their web and ip address cannot be used to derive an individual's location based on the records that we have the twenty six dollars page it do not provide location information unless there are additional steps taken by the parties to obtain that information location suggests that in five hundred or six hundred occasions he used it from his home therefore you could derives the information that he was asked at the time and you it would give you the device information and it would give you where within reference to the ip address the device accessed the particular website or the application but i know  done that with that device right but it may not but it would not tell you whether i was at home or at war or somewhere else when  to be a search in the ip registry address to see who was the provider for that ip address once you've identified the provider you would have to serve some sort of peanut in this instance it was an emergency disclosure request pursuant to and two alleging that there was an immediate danger or physical harm and that would have to be served on the provider and only if the provider felt that there was an emergency that existed would then those records be they were taking in this case to identify where the location where the device accessed this application and who in fact was the individual because although you may have an ip address you don't necessarily know who in fact access that web site or application and i want to know what that the carpenter court found that cell site records didn't require the additional steps the information contained within south site location information gave long for sent all the information that they needed to have to seen lenda cell where the cell phone was what power it was nearest what address that power was located and so that's vastly different than the situation that we have here in that agent needed to take the additional steps to figure out where this ip address was registered to what information they can glean from that address and whether or not they can locate the individual who was involved in this case the pollen list that conversation with a nine year old minor child so the reliance on carpenter is very distinguishable here and that is why the government filed a supplemental authority that every case before carpenter and every case since carpenter has held that ip address information and subscriber information fall squarely under the rd party doctrine they have found in instances whether it was a computer that generated the information in order to use the kick application they cannot then claim a th amendment protection or th amendment right in that information in this case the appellant made the affirmative and the list in a step to access that application and in doing so allowed keke to chronicle that he logged in over five hundred dollars in one the timing but again it's worthy to note that these twenty six pages that were the basis of the motion to suppress and  made that the court did deny the motion to suppress the hearing in this case and i would submit to the court that the fact a ledge in docket entry thirteen which was the defendant's motion to suppress basically said that these twenty six pages provided logon information and subscriber information and the court had no additional details that were alleged in docket entry thirteen that would this be what the current status of the law was and that is that those records  mails but the e mail address that the appellant in this case provided he voluntarily disclosed got in order to use the kickout location this is information that individual turnover in order to use an chain mail that is while the in this instance they did not serve any search warrants on that e mail address in order to obtain more information what they did was they did a property records search of the home after they received the internet subscriber internet provider information that that ip address was registered to a specific residence it did a property search on on that residence and found that shelley trader the appellant's mother resided there they also did a florida d m v search to find that the appellant had listed that residence as his mailing address so with regards to you know any further inside of the e mail address conference name is scott his last name the street or he used once they saw that the e mail address was asked rader at yahoo and they saw that someone by the name of scott trader listed his mailing address common sense tells us every time we go to a website or anytime we sign up for an application the st thing that they ask they're sent in put your e mail address you know and they do so for commercial reasons they do still to be able to contact you and you can choose whether or not to turn over that information and not be addresses are associated with all kinds of devices right so there could be household appliances gaming on so any number of cars right yes and they work in conjunction with the internet provider and so if someone uses a gaming console or someone uses alexa for instance it's going to generate an ip address but it pervasive as a cell phone but today is not that day and this record before this court didn't extend the carpenter requirement to issue such as ip address and i will rely on the arguments i made today as well as those made in the brain and i thank you for your   the ip address here is is totally about location your honor this is what law enforcement does and in a regular basis in such cases when they're dealing with internet based offenses they obtain the ip address from whatever medium it is that's being used they then go to the service provider which in this case was comcast they asked particular mister trader accessed the wireless internet system at his mother's house that wireless internet router gets an ip number that's the ip number that they got in this case a device to hooks up to that wireless assist them gets what's called a private ip number which is not published to the outside world it's only so that router can recognise authorized devices on that wireless system at his mother's house and so if you say you took your router and you moved to california you would very likely get a new ip address then once again what if you just moved across town judge i don't know apologize i'm not i'm not that  days did not change it was the home right yes all right so help me to sis you know when they about carpenter was a telephone you know we did tell records forever we still do tell records nobody complains about toll records from phones of landline phone you have a tower records you can get toll records you know that tell right todd that landline phone is tied to a house and every time it chews you know somebody is usenet from that one though cation seems a difference to me is it's this one location i mean what your case is now and up in the fax and and and one location here it's not tracking the person when one is just one location it's a fixed location in fact you just made the point the router is tied to this location is right to the device is tied to the route of the routers in the home we now thirty days it's a home that seems different than moving wherever that guy went you know these car these cases are robberies they move it over to wendy's they're going to pizza they're going around here we know where ever they at all around town so that to me is materially different help me with that yes well st off we need to record profit we one hundred and eighty of the contacts were with mobile l different locations when when the phone leaves the home it goes off the wireless and i'm talking about in your case with his t v ok so he just found his cell phone application yet yes ma'am what it when it when it gets out of range violation of that carpenter shows there is a reasonable exit expectation of privacy here and then it's not even the diminished expectation and carpenter but because it was in the home it was a full