stratton case did not just established that mr decker had a non discretionary duty to amend the actuarial table that that issue is expressly ordered him to amend that actuarial table and th mr decker and again to the extent that there are already at that have examined this issue and they are discussed in my brief in the lab that was that was violated was not actually issued against the three defendants who were the prison officials who were found to not have qualified didn't you to be in that at the core reason those three official help work that there will be institution they were aware of the the agency an official capacity to personal liability which is what's been alleged in this action and what establishes the defendant should have been aware based on fairly established law denied qualified immunity but it group name the institution and the policy that was that issue that gave rise to the nine hundred eighty three dollars claim it was made in that case it is the same situation here your honor mr decker was the recipient of the stratton order as the administrator of the agency he was not free to simply ignore that order or believe they did not have to follow with the question for qualified immunity purposes did  have a non discretionary duty to amend the table stratton said yes you do have a non discretionary duty because you are the administrator of this agency and this agency must do so and your the only person in the agency w authority to issue this regulation were ordering you to issue there was no basis for mr decker to doubt that you needed to comply with the stratton order given those circumstances your honor that is why i cannot claim us to review a decision a contempt citation for mistake or you have instead brought an entirely separate federal action under nineteen eighties really so it's not enough to tell me that well you know we should have had  would be bound by that order because he was a breezy to that issue was litigated in stratton by the d if it was to be considered a separate party it was resolved  ordered in fact to institute a change to make the change to the actuarial table and therefore he is precluded from disputing the do you have to have that non discretionary duty because they were they were bound together by the finding that was made in stratton as a matter of preclusion he can i mean he's qualified immunity in this case have to rest upon the fact that his duty here was  a discretionary it was not a mandatory or non discretionary nature of the district court agrees with that point so what i'm trying to explain here is that if the court was to distinguish between the status of mr decker and the as an end as being subject to the court's order and to find that that raises the qualified immunity issue potentially the court must go deeper here and consider the whole being a negro and the question as to whether mr twenty two of my brief and i would point out to the extent that the authorities are out there which have examined this issue of qualified immunity in respect of orders from involving agencies or policies of government actors as a whole versus government individuals in addition to the web there's case discussed but the aged twenty one you have the task your case where the governor did not get qualified immunity when he violated an order to mandate the release of prisoners he wasn't actually a subject of that order he was aware of the order and he blocked the release of those prisoners that had been ordered by the court he was not able to claim qualified qualified immunity here and say he did not have a mandatory duty to amend the table is not in compliance with the law clearly he did and that was the question that was uncertain in the prior case of the shouting litigation  understand the state of the law that time which was before the stratton decision was unclear it was not established that there was a non discretionary duty that not but that question was resolved in stratton and therefore mr dagher was required to take action to amend the table because he didn't have discretion to not amend it i think i probably have consumed my time and i don't want to overdo it with the court you've been very patient is there any questions i can answer for the