started to realize that there could be a question about ness in some or other related appeals that have also involved the attorneys and similar situated we have raised the issue of jurisdiction before in light of the area tendency a school district could seek recruitment we reckon we think it's an open question i think the other side will tell you it's for close by the circle he saw that being said we think it was the outside of new york city that sort of that the case is not made and i can i just i'm sorry did not get off the movements yet but i know your stand how if someone leaves the district and then comes back at some subsequent point why they don't have to just start with a brand new i yet come back just a judge so this question is and i don't know how this works so i'm interested in both parties in lightning us why is it not the case that the family would just have to start mean then there is potentially a question of what the child needs how close is that to be educational placement was ordered in this case and given in this case we were directed to comply and it was say well look that's where you left off and that seems awfully sensible to start again or are you suggesting that somehow the hearing officer his hands would be tied in some sort of issue preclusion sense and that's what letter which was literally almost filed on the th hour prior to disallow argument quite honestly i think this letter is nothing more than an honest a circus newt would be your clients if you're not if you're telling us your clients are not moving for dismissal as newt i mean because there might be some questions about whether it really is moot depending on your client's circumstances in their future intent are you telling us you don't want this dismissed just moot you're not you're not prepared to put forward whatever facts would establish its new ness i think i think mean the questions that we would have about whether it's moot would pertain to your clients their move to long island their future intentions and sadder you're not putting anything forward in that regard and you're not urging us to find this appeal mo it's it's also irrelevant with respect to this case involves the one thousand nine hundred school year it was not involved anything in the future tenancy is a nd circuit and also the g probably no case is that the deal we failed to make any recommendation for pendency placement in this case i'm sorry  mr albert could you just take a step back for me what was the relief you sought in the district court with your complaint it was multiple things essentially it was to appeal and what or of this state review our officer which is just the remedy you wanted not the basis your claim of what was the relief you sought and a cut to the chase i'm not trying to hide anything client has left so the cline is not looking for a future placement relief from the city so my question i suppose all kinds of the chase is there any relief you sought that you have not obtain d well pendency involves multiple things you're correct your honor and that payment was was made on behalf of the students for four pendency and the city has now represented they're not going to try to recoup that so that's what it would be that it would be it would be our position that that's not possible under very claire's precedent ok nd i'm getting conceded that they're not even of the students and other words because that can now serve as the springboard for moving forward in other words the payments would be five to essentially maintain the student's status really receiving that what are death declaration that says this the students tendency rights are at x and it would identify the elements of that educational program  placement that then becomes the defining fact we establish what the status quo is for that student grooving forward and is that include their school districts or only if they the student was receiving what was determined to be appropriate for that student at the time clearly over time and to a different district and there  there could be issues that make it no longer appropriate the student could need additional services student could need it fewer services so it's it's hard to predict the dispositive nature of the opinion as to what tenancy is because it might be valuable for future reference but it's not it's it would be it would be an advisory opinion it would be based on facts for a particular school year a discrete period of time which which has not which is not  the spring of this year it's been a temporary move while everyone copes with the virus your clients nuke in november keep us in nineteen is there's a permanent move and they have no no new york city residents an appeal is moot i would expect it to be supported by those facts thank you program and school called i home to the students for attendance in placement that was simply incorrect on a motion for reconsideration judged change gears and determined that that did not happen however she aired by doubling down on the on the on her determination that a school district does not have an school district has the obligation and the sole responsibility and authority to make a recommendation as to the location for students pendency placement however there is a situation in which the panel in that case determined that what happens if the school district does not make a recommendation and who are that recommendation for pendency is not available i st know that the on availability issue is no way to be found it's not within the statute the regulations were in in any  involving i hope is that the jail we never recommended i hope to the student for a pendency placement clearly using  that rationale when it's only the deal we who has the authority to make a recommendation from for a pen and say if they don't recommend it it certainly can't be available to the pa the i hope school for a total sum of a one hundred dollars deposit each of the years through the eighteen for the one thousand seven hundred and eighteen school year a hearing officer even determined that i hope was in fact from prior from prior matters particularly the school changed in that rather than just a one hundred dollars deposit thing the school now required six parents to one thousand dollars upon in romans twenty frewer one thousand dollars on the st day of school and then forty thousand dollars both in september and another for what he one thousand dollars in january that simply was not in the cards for this family is not in the record is that in your complaint i don't know if it was in the of the individual with disabilities and education act is an automatic injunction it's without regard to a showing of the reparable and without a showing of likelihood of success on the merits with any of the typical standards required for a preliminary injunction it's automatic upon the filing of the administrative due process complaints i think you could be criticized for not noticing or sooner so that we were not doing this literally hours before an argument i hear that you're on it and we apologize and it just happened in this case and not operate excuses but b