there are three primary issues which we believe are before the court at this time the first issue is consistent with the order of this court or march twenty eighth two thousand and five in which the court requests that the parties be prepared to discuss the that is in the order of discouragement and she informs the f c c that in order to enforce the judgment you have to go to bankruptcy court  protect your interests we c matter but i think we can distinguish your honor somehow your example with the facts of this case in this case the receiver was appointed on an application of the f c c in the underlyin bankruptcy code section three sixty four before which is part of the order issued by judge snyder she found that they couldn't force it but as to chosen chosen in the action books records bank accounts lease old interest in all other property belonging to and controller position of the family company he was a recover money for the corporations to pay goes are you who are injured and who are the parties people who are invested in the companies and creditors that was his are here that the pesky c retain some potential to recover some money on this we don't know whether they're legally entitled to it or not but they are they are you are you would argue that  both ways they can't argue on one hand that they're entitled to the benefits of the receiver and not take the burden of the received the settlement of this case it's one or the and there's a court order that the judgment be paid to the receiver that's correct so your claim and bankruptcy is based on the judgment it is based on a judgment now it's important to understand what happened when the district court was entering the discourse in favor of the on the other hand the government was exempt from the automatic stay and accordingly was given a judgment at that point the receiver pursued the receiver and initially pursued different avenues in right ben thanks can get orders of receivership as well carrying it all the way through at this point that i mean let's assume the bank has the judgment it's namely orders to pay over to a receiver receiver makes a deal but it's a judgment has not discharged by the deal so the argument before the bank that it has standing in bankruptcy court to enforce the judgment or pursue its rights and bankruptcy notwithstanding any deal the receiver me right so far so good i would take it as that's not me that's that's your monetary argument a public entity and an individual bankruptcy and other your public powers over corporations and this is an individual chapter seven so the argument might be made and pennon of any monetary climate have that the public interest of the right now let's move to the second part i understand that and i don't have a response to the second part now let's assume you didn't have any monetary interest at all that you just have your police power what you would like to get to the question at apple fire repository who isn't really so he doesn't have of done anything wrong he just has to be sitting around with the money without him just feel about it so there's no there's no implication from the on a matter of a lot of probably send back for the findings i gather your argument here is that all the evidence was still the district i was looking at the same evidence to navarre and there was no there were no be no reason to just send it back if you think filing bankruptcy cannot pay you that's is a bad thing then i suggest you're going to have to write congress because that's why people on a bankruptcy that's the whole nature of it and then judge russell who's been on the bench more any agree just situation if this case were dismissed i think the best majority of the bankruptcies in the country will be dismissed at the end her fourth a bankruptcy court making that these points about pending seven o seven a motion prior to the reenactment of four thousand and four morgan clearly stated that a seven or seven or eight motion does not extend the if they paid it to twenty five thousand dollars payments the receiver purported to represent the interests of the f c c and itself the document the dollar for dollar is only good for a fifty thousand other credit against the claim of the f c c the judgments are one and the same there's only one judgment the judgment for contempt for do that they had plenty of time between judge snyder remarks and judge muscles comments about you have other remedies to protect your interests they fail to do