while the agreement itself the joint venture agreement which was negotiated actually between all three parties were there when they first originally met and discussed the prospects of doing business on the navajo nation in fact that there was correspondence which went back and forth between smith parties must reasonably understand what they're doing and it's not unjust or unfair at the time when they entered into the agreement they understood what they're doing when they when they addition at that period of time is that when they breach that agreement they knew that any types of remedies would be set forth which would be done in nevada the second circuit in the running cast the run a very local ninety and you all seem to be more interested in living gating what court you're in then you are interested in litigating the merits of the case why why is that the kit why is that so significant to your client to be up on the court of appeals over whether you should be in nevada or i assume arizona would not raise any of these issues what is the issue was very significant actually it goes to the heart of the agreement because in the event that the necessary funding and which to go out and acquire the necessary permits leases and was to establish the network that it's not fact it was unable to do for a period of a long period of time ok i see i mean the whole point is you're you're you're you're trying to make this all into one great nevada it didn't in terms so you've got to somehow get it beyond its terms the state of nevada but we believe that the expressed language of the first on the face of the non disclosure agreement which the both of the parties recognise when they signed it express forcible and any other jurisdiction pursuant to the law as a set forth and venture grants actually what does that mean this agreement jump shall be enforceable in any other jurisdiction without mind what do you say that means we believe that that's right honor what they could have done at that period of time so they simply could have asked for any of the information which was contained in the non disclosure in the i thought you were saying you're not getting anything until you signed this nondisclosure about what they could have done at that period of time to say what do you mean one of the law times what is without binding and or are into supposed to mean well it's not by i believe the provision has been started and there is so to avoid the fact you go into any different courts and then pose a sufficient bond which would be determined by the jurisdiction in order to get an injunction you have to cause some type of a bond and that's and that's that's what this you know without bond leaps right off the page at me in or that's pretty much the same thing the judge reimers saying that's not a form selection clause it says you can you can go in and get an injunction or a temporary restraining order for breaching this nondisclosure agreement without having to post one of these bonds the key word is enforceable right yes right and forcible and any other jurisdiction i mean forcible doesn't give you a for sound to me like a florence form selection class where you read it with the first part of that sentence or not what the parties when they're working together because of the difficulty and they knew of the knowledge of the difficulty in which to do business on the navajo nation the after they signed the nondisclosure agreement i'm prepared to say that they had it in their hands what would that give the equation i mean if i got killed i think your agreement in my hands what am i going to take away from it except that the laws of the state of in so you're saying they could have seen it before signing the non disclosure agreement if they'd wanted to govern make any sense i got i'm saying is that they could have received any of the information which was contained inside the joint venture agreement which was not confidential or did you take a company that was put together with the holy indian owned company authorized to do business and they have a whole reservation in the principles and did you take four individuals were members of and residents of the  the agreement in essence provided that smith magli would pay all of the expenses incurred these four individuals pursuing the interests of indigent have their expenses and travel expenses in dealing with enamel nation and would  entirety for the construction of the microwave towers when they were completed the towers would then be conveyed the ownership of the tower to be conveyed to him did you know where they could rent where they would then rent space their northeastern arizona and other people that might want to rent space almost powers so you are one would receive a rent abatement until they got their money back that they spent for that and then going forward they would pay agreement the non disclosure agreement or one became concerned as to what the terms and conditions of the joint venture agreement was because we didn't want to be in a position where we found to our horror and chagrin that one of our competitors on this tower that we were going to be a tenant on nextel or alltel or cingular or something like that and that's really what we wanted to know who is that really is your partner in this in this joint venture the if you look at the join agreement and i don't think you need to but if you need you'll find there there forgive the arizona language and no secrets in there there is no no secret methods or formulas for dealing with indian indian nation the confidentiality was concerned with on their part the sensitivity was that people on the navajo reservation not know that the income stream to dish n really a major difference i don't think they argue along differently than we do they see things differently than we do i'm not going to in less and less you believe i need to do so i'm not going to dwell on the whether the  didn't think about it that much to be honest with you but we believed to be a choice of the law agreement that we were going to agree that that nondisclosure agreement would be bound by whatever laws would go roll the joint venture me how did you read this agreement shall be enforceable in any other i would i would question the and the battle of superior courts interest in joining arizona corp to not do things in arizona and so i would guess you and you would go to arizona  but the other things that came up in the course of the thing was in course of this was that they said that there were other things activities in the part on the part of smith bagley that would give rise to on the one hand general jurisdiction  tortious interference with a contract that would seem that that was the jurisdiction so why doesn't that make a prime fish a case of specific jurisdiction that your honor is an allegation in the second amended complaint but in the principle and install one says we do intend to go ahead with this this development of this network on the navajo nation and we're excited about it and look forward to doing that that was an e mail number three there was an starland saying in essence complaining about the performance of the video take people in which our lack thereof and and so that was the third contact they claim that because that passive it's not an interactive website and it's primarily if you look at it it's it's all in the record i can give you sites for the record if you need them but it's because you have before you but if you look at that it is primarily directed to native americans living on the reservation there's things like stick your tongue out at the city folks have a you can get a twenty twenty dollars a month cell phone things like that so that's that's that's the end all and one final one as they say and this is much like the with any kind of a length of poll ten foot or otherwise so if they have not met for inflection clauses are good and enforceable we don't have one in this case we have we do not have the facts that give rise even a complaint and support you when when the when the complaint when the jurisdiction is called into question you can't look at the allegations of the complaint you then that's when they have the burden of coming forward and making a separate part of the clink complaint new take we didn't do that what really happened here is this and i'll sit down and did you take a quick performing after they got the seven hundred fifty thousand dollars from siren we were hurt badly and they got what they wanted to get it got the e t c status which was very lucrative through the one thousand nine hundred six clinton act which allows them to receive an incredible monopoly to the tune of about five hundred thousand dollars per month on the revenue which generated through the work was to turn over to the joint venture which they never did but in digital you got nothing back from him digitally we got nothing back from him digitized but we know we don't have a thing back from smith back which they promised why don't you have anything back from a digital well after they