here me yes thank you the issue before the court is whether there procedural violation of new york satisfaction of more statutes constitute an injury in fact under the sp of a federal statutory right alone conferred article three standing injury in fact is not automatically satisfied just because a statute grants a person the statutory right to sue just stablish an injury in fact a party must show that he or she suffered an invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete meaning it must exist it must be real and not abstract and particular i meaning it must affect the plaintiffs in a personal and individual way for free but my question is can can state statute also well a state legislature cannot for article stand article three standing in  the in this instance is this a violation of the state mortgage recording statute where the mortgage was recorded three months prior to the commencement of this action specifically the satisfaction was recorded on september  legislature's view that this was not a consequential to the people of new york so the fact that the pay off the require equitation happened before suits filed seems to me kind of irrelevant said they fully are allege that they're being the basis of their complaint was that appellant failed to present to satisfaction of mortgage research or certificate of don't charge if they had including a was a live one client that particularly and during that period our property was incorrectly in comfort kind of there thereby slandering its title those would have been somewhat conclusory allegations but those would have would that be sufficient and if not why not the risk of contention i mean if they if they allege a risk that would be different however again it's specific to each individual at the time the action is complete so may be had in another instance they  satisfaction not been recorded there could have been a risk of potential harm again it would have had to have been alleged but in the case in the fact that hand none of the rip a possible potential risks were play and nor can they because the farms were was i'm sorry but that was raised for the st time in opposition to the underlying motion to dismiss so when looking at whether a party has standing to look to the four corners of the pleading absence of any allegations of personal harm with regard to risk or reputational injury or slander of title type harm that was suffered in the period before the correction cone case which the court decided there was no allegation in the complaint that the individual who was a person who was facing a debt collection at things that were just mentioned slander of title clear title reputational credit and the like which is what we're dealing with the suspect is that a violation of the procedure they demonstrates a patient risk of harm to the underlying case in the district court we did say and request if you if a court found the allegation to be insufficient on this motion dismiss that we we could and would allege more which goes d ultimately to the point we uphold the finding of the district court that there was standing that it still has the issue is joined bank of new york now and will claim that there was no more to your client and see dismissal on s contrary to your position about the can't record ation statute and and so teams to me that something more than alleging the violation of the statute practically is going to be required in order to establish article three standing that there is a sufficiently concrete risk of injury and so i'm concerned about what we look at the legislative history of the statute to determine what the state legislature was specific did nothing else the harm to my client in terms of the emotional distress and time well founded on the case law to read there's an implicit assumption that there is title works great credit works america if the moment that something occurs that changes one's status in terms of whether g s for credit reporting went to japan a landlord that used for insurance purposes does not magically transform  order to file the satisfaction and and subjected to no more that i really have a five hundred dollars fine for failure to do it for sixty days to graduate find  terrifying cloud upon title that causes people to experience psychological misery it just doesn't seem to make sense and and also it seems to me that if we join if legislature was not direct whole anyone else respect the us with the legislatures but that's legislatures decision one can equally argue that many of the other federal statutes that we've been discussing also could have been there also grace period by the times of the pen twenty of learned that the creditors name was wrong and had not been harmed otherwise even though in their in their life it's moot just a recording here is argued by think the new york to suffice and to end the clean yes i think they were courting was done three months before you file the case i'm not sure that makes it move at all but on the logic of the argument you just made it would of harm in all these cases were strewn struble as well as no allegation of actually any specific manifest injury by virtue of the things that the court self said yes this matters not that for these claims on the fair credit reporting agency which by the way those did not update for months on in their underlying databases and paid more in rent it is the risk of harm that motivates the court and minutes so we'll hear from you yes thank you your honor so i won't take up too much more of the court's time i just counsel listed a number of arguments as to why the appellee suffered a real risk of harm however they he argues that he then moved to georgia but they obviously were able to obtain an apartment they don't they again there's nothing in the complain that establishes a real concrete particularized actual or imminent risk of harm to any of the arguments that were raised not position to the motion are speculative they did not come to statute did not satisfy the concrete injury requirement of standing and in struble the court rely on the nic locking in this respectfully submitted that neckcloth which is identical to the facts at hand should be applied in this instance