judge can be and his colleagues already decided everything that is needed to reverse and to remand this time with hailers instructions to the district court as to how to go about completing this case the only thing left were left to be in two thousand and one more to conduct limited damages discovery and then to calculate the damages that were due mr consent for his oath for his one half because in any event because in any event there would still have been there was if there were an open issue with respect to ownership there was there would still have been an issue with respect to whether the royalties that were because judge can be wrote that he understood what the copyright was and what the song writing it what that scheduled asset meant he said it was copyright and rights to royalty payments for songs written for the said that what mr can stand now was asserting and what he had the right to and what he should not be permitted to reclaim was partial copyright ownership everyone understood challenge and there are no challenges he makes his way out and he takes out via technical abandonment or expressed provision as as creditors give them already noticed if there was a question if somebody said look here's a copyright it's not something that you can talk it's it's an intangible and there are competing  really attempting to turn what was basically a claim into a declare the effect of it is some sort of a declared great judgement action that's what you're suggesting here you're suggesting that this would be the same as a declare three judgment action and that in effect because they didn't jump in and that it's rest judicata now and that there are bound by your client's assertion of his rights and i think the point made by judge  on the pa associated with the l i you compositions and the creatures compositions and the the entire record of the proceedings of the bankruptcy court he's looking at the judge can be your goes through the proceedings in the bankruptcy court and one of the things that they have looked at was the entry on w the the damages discovery and the open book account because the primary i think the primary element of drudge massa's decision was that mr consent could not prove up damages now sandal's lawyer said was that he did not need any more discovery on the issue of the creatures of the night compositions those were the ones claims that were going to be transferred i think he did say in his rule twenty six report in his twenty six that report that they needed to finish up damages discovery a lawyer of mr consent i was then withdrew and mr with mr casino then attempted to get other counsel as soon as he got other counsel mr binney nice appeared for him and requested one hundred twenty days to complete complete damages discovery it's not really any discovery that's needed on the issue of the issue of the up and everybody knows what happened everybody and the record of what happened in the bankruptcy court is what it is no discovery is needed but ultimately resolutions need to be made that he asked for that discovery and he did not get that discovery and the reason that he did that casts the burden of proof in what is essentially an accounting haze on the defendant to show that they have properly accounted so having been denied the scott free having been denied the benefit of that statement they schedule they scheduled a joint status conference the typical practice is that you come great one status conference and the judge sets a new discovery deadline and that gets incorporated in the order and it was at that session in which with respect to the argument that either this court previously in its two thousand and one decision or the bankruptcy court you know nine hundred ninety plan of reorganization somehow abrogated or voided the governing agreement