available for consideration and certainly it was available to foreigners to show that for example that somebody as powerful in the market is wired house or in b c and it seems to me like it would be your period of time to say that northwest tend to mean oregon and washington but if that's true you can't go back in time and change what was and if you weren't in british columbia then you worked in british market share was related to western oregon and washington not british columbia and my point is if you include british columbia in the market you expect in the market but weyerhaeuser has no share in british columbia but your honor you can't change the markings between the two periods which is what they tried to do in the ross simmons case and let me direct you to the plaintiff's closing argument where they go through the geographic market for  the relevant question a legal question for this court is whether or not there is any doubt and whether the finding of western art and are going with washington and british and they used oregon and washington and for them to have and use that for their own strategic reasons to not allow another plane to come along who now is benefit is now going to use the finding of a pacific northwest market and include mind from this record that there was another alternative for the for the for the geographic market being oregon washington versus argan washington british columbia  of the question is whether or not the british columbia of course in which they include in the case for their purposes of monopoly or our mouth reading a few yes yes and they also put on a long story about how they attempted to buy th counsel available and there is nothing there's no case law that we have seen to suggest that someone can be the chairman and initiate a claim later the remaining an owner of the company record is that the answer to that is yes that they're all right that there are that the company in washington has some control over whether or not that may happen fits within the definition it's a cluster just in the same way that the three oregon washington mills are clustered around the border likewise the oregon washington washington d c metals are in the same  to describe the acquisition of coast in british columbia and then importantly paragraph forty two of the stipulated facts which can be found at c r and it says it has an annual lumber production char whether the jury necessarily found a market in the pacific northwest that's all the judge pattern gave issue preclusion to there was no obligation on the jury no legal obligation to define the precise parameters of the market the jury was instructed how to do the final market how to put a market together the jury was then asked was there relevant was there a market for alter sawlogs in the pacific northwest and they responded to that yes and judge describing in this case the jury came to a special interop it's more a verdict that said yes there is a relevant market in the pacific northwest and underneath that as to courts for that including warehouses on exhibit strictly later tax with respect to production in two thousand and one for example it's maybe about an ace of the telephone and weyerhaeuser clearly had some some piece of that as a buyer in the market so that even if you tribute it almost nothing to warehouse we'd still be in a position where the even if you increase the denominator you still weren't up in the area where there's market share that was  close to sixty five percent saying that it would still be and have to redo the math i did do it at one point i think it's it's certainly fifteen above is my recollection and it's easy enough to do even if you attribute all of that out of those sawlogs purchased by warehouse yours and attempted monopoly market share situation and clearly zero is not the not the right number one is your damages which is accept logs period because then that then became fully controlled by weyerhaeuser and to access them at a fair price  and you can refer to that for if you can if you need to do so thank you thank you very much the second point i want to point out is we're talking about two very different standards here one is was there any evidence from which you jury could have included british columbia sources whether it was clear or certain no doubt no  when he goes to the jury and specifically mentions pacific northwest where he's talking about are going in washington where his two experts they are going in washington and where none of the evidence none of the evidence with regard to british columbia given in the context of whether it is included or not in the market definition even the stipulation that they give you even the location of the mills none of that is in the context of market definition and whether or not does matter and where they read repeatedly rely on a sixty five percent market share and have their expert a pint that doctors are via klein's that sixty five percent market share it with he uses to base the fac include it they would have to do with british columbia and there would then be an argument over whether or not to include or exclude british columbia and what that share would have been and whether they were damages or not damages but it was very important to include british columbia because he'd still be precluded for that period of time if they had done that year and then they would have had to deal with the issue of how they deal with having british columbia in the market for one period of time in another period of time and what they got might be a different market than it is in two thousand and five and then so they could easily have still find whatever you want to convert the market whenever and however you want to decline and we're happy with the definition because that's number one but number two your honor the fundamental issue here is whether or not the granted issue preclusion was proper both under the ninth circuit standards with regard to whether or not there was an identity issue with regard to the geographic market and but there's something short of that that i don't think you're really addressing and that is this that there may very well and proper issue preclusion here but the definition of what was precluded really wasn't clear would have been and they attribute it to all factors ok and some of the factors that they mentioned in terms of the anti competitive acts of weyerhaeuser was the acquisition of the coast mountain mill in british