was going to reserve five minutes but the bottom line is this is that she was unable to actually listen to that speech she was attacked she was attacked with bare mace pepper spray she was hit over the head seventy two thousand and seventeen i'm doing it again now what's important here and that the issues have been well briefed and here to answer questions from application is very important to understand what record and you file a motion to disqualify a district judge because she was appointed by a democratic president and went to berkeley law school and you are seeking the voluntary or involuntary request for refusal i was concerned because of the highly charged atmosphere at berkeley and the fact that the police department as we alleged on waters was ordered to stand down and not protect my client  never actually i'm asking about yes i'm asking about the district judge not asking about what happened in the case you asked the district judge to separate side because she was appointed by a democratic president and had attended the university of california at berkeley it's hard for me to find any justification for that request and assuming i'm right could she take that into account in determining pro hockey sense no because here is the point i'm making cried beach it was not revoked for until a year into the case i already been as a baby in the case it was because the city of berkeley raised that issue that this occurred now why is it that i was allowed to participate three year complaint the police departments were instructed not to do anything about it and my client was seriously harmed so i had a duty to raise that issue wasn't intended to be abrasive or in any way disrespectful and as to that individual i don't put aside for a nd your general allegations about it because i don't see anything in the complaint that links this individual got aside for a nd i just want to focus on that because i want to ask her her lawyer questions about this too i make a point of this is the reason i'm part of it is no let me finish asking the question and you can make your point is i read the complaint the allegation is that jury closing argument i'm just asking some questions right now correct my question is their nd amended complaint was dismissed because a motion to dismiss was file and your side never responded to it correct whether the judge abused her discretion in dismissing it because nobody responded to the motion to dismiss you know because she had already dismissed those defendants with regard to the  of any allegation otherwise we know it from the plaintiff's counsel's three statements in his opening argument that the police were ordered to stand down the quote instructed not to do anything observers and i'm trying to figure out how i can infer that from the well pleated allegations in the complaint paragraph seventy five of the complaint excerpt of record  in addition age fifteen of places replied agree the individual regions quote ordered the police not to act and quot in addition carry commissioners of byron county well known for elements the officers violated person constitutional rights often there is no such allegation this complaint need claims that means unreasonable in princes are not allowed speculation is not allow conclusory allegations are not allowed rather the owners must state in their complaints  was formerly the chancellor of u c berkeley all fail for multiple reasons and it is your court was correct to dismiss the principal one is the one that my colleague was just addressing with respect to the city and that's what the allege against these university officials is that they failed provide p rotection to the plaintiff and other individuals attending the event but this court and the supreme court have been very clear for number of years that the government has no duty to prevent private parties from interfering with the constitutional rights of intervene and tell you not to do that was an affirmative act panel and johnson said no that's not sufficient the decision to switch from a more aggressive operation plan to a more passive one was not affirmative conduct and that's simply the standard i mean certainly at a minimum there be no clearly established right to that and for purposes over caption claim your i think the district court got this one right as well the allegation here is that plaintiff was treated no under underlying constitutional violation which there wouldn't be if the court affirms the dismissal of equal protection and st amendment claims then the pain at claim can survive you know there are other reasons why the pain i claim fails that we lead and i prefer some also happy to address your honor of wanting the government code section eight hundred and forty five absolute immunity under california law for failure to provide a question is there any case law that you can inform us about that says that if you have a group of thing happening you know the bear mace the flashlight a group of people alleged to be acting together why would that not be an aiding and abetting of a port of entry because it's based on pure speculation as to my clients and combination on her again i don't know whether it's true or not but the question is whether this is an allegation that is impossible i mean given the facts as alleged i don't see how that is all of the different rulings of this court which were very prejudicial and rise to the something doesn't our case law say that you can't establish bias and prejudice because of rulings against you you know it must be external to the case ye that it was threats here that threatened free speech freedom of assembly and by the way there were specific allegations that was incorrect discrimination on the basis of sexual persuasion