we had three three reasons for that one was the cost particularly with respect to her issue for her she had no reason to feel of those costs at that for those price increases that increased level of her ch  of evidence one dad one i would call structure the structural evidence that is it's a good mediately adjacent geographic market with the same good destry structure that is highly concentrated in canada that's a major factor in the third factor is that each of these u s domestic competitors who were there we got others that their competitors in the united states when his reports are subjected to the jury they will say this is nothing very persuasive but at this point we have dr paul true report based upon the interaction and the control over pricing from the u s in canada that this is this is an indication of the likelihood of conspiracy we can simply disregard dr period as will actual manifest agreement not to compete as it relates to mars and second i want to talk some about the issues that you've raised with respect to canada because i judge car got them exactly right it's important when we focus on canada to to understand  time between canada and the united states the reason jeff connor founded the theory failed was because there is no evidence in the record that the mass to be executives were aware of the canadian trade spend conspiracy convicted of doing anything wrong yet in canada but it sells says nothing about what mars executives knew and also remember that the issue of mars canada's relationship to mars united states was addressed by case and with respect to with respect to mars canada judge connor judge connor found that because the relationship the relationship between mars canada in march us was there's a very good relationship in the united states entering american territory only and this is morris canada only to engage in periodic organizational meetings and purchase wrong materials several degrees of separation judge connor found several from approval that u s executives were not actively involved in from mars in canada that that was what that was what was found both with respect to the motion to dismiss and bear in mind players never appealed judge connors ruling dismissing march morris canada mars us had no involvement in canadian pricing there were several organizations was there some reporting relationship of course which is what you would expect but there is no evidence that anybody in march us knew about any of the unlawful conduct that's been alleged be considered in determining what was happening in the us and then again i hate the course of the players have two different theories about how it is that canada relates to the united states but  i think again he feels to identify any evidence that supports the notion that what happened in canada related to the united states but you have the same guys sitting on top who are in charge of pricing in  authority for mars in mars canada were different from the people with decision making authority for mars in the united states and those decisions were made the people in mars canada that made those decisions did them independently of consultations with people in the united states and to inform them yes when did when prices were changed in the united states they were those decisions were made by the individuals that march us today consult the people of canada no those we know is there any evidence of crime yet that traditional conspiracy non economic efforts and again as it relates to mars and be careful because when the planes talk about the defendants and they sometimes don't distinguish between each of us when it comes to mars we don't think there's any evidence any evidence that suggests that it was a broader conspiracy these facts i think are important all three price increases in the united states effectively were initiated by mars in two thousand to two thousand mars decision on her own future consumption packaged products is what led her she a month later to initiate a price increase for for media consumption goods in two thousand and seven course mars initiated the price increase there not a shred of evidence not a shred of evidence that mars knew anything about anybody else's intentions at the time that mars either announced a price increase in two thousand to announce the way change and products in two thousand and four were announced the price increase in two thousand and seven no evidence that we anything about what anybody else might do or what their intentions were we were certainly aware of the concept of mind pricing and in one nine hundred ninety eight had adopted what we call the fast follower policy that basically said if somebody else initiates a price increase for the meat consumption goods we're going to follow we did that because we perceived that line pricing was put in the industry and whether everybody did it or not is wrong as there were some people doing it we needed to protect ourselves that's why we adopted that policy and i think it's important to know that contemporaneously prepared business documents certainly from ours which i can talk about better than that i isn't is the fact or the i put it this way is the fact of formal charges canada against a participant in the chocolate industry is market for chocolate was not the best at that time that's what the evidence shows as as a result of the two thousand and two price increases very big a lot of money and that's why in two thousand and four when they again raised pri