us bankruptcy court where a claim is allowed in the bankruptcy court is that similar in the i don't think so your honor i think in this case the claim was allowed but then there was or there was an appeal it was a to restored in bonus and the at that point the creditor has an opportunity to bring what's called an injunction a payment to create and in this case the same of i believe would be considered to be a judicial is that in this case the u s assets mr mann joining failed to declare the u s assets and so as a result he was he was violating tonia law and what happened was the new receive leave of court from the bankruptcy court to pursue the trustee determined because of cost they were not going to ask go after the assets united states so that the result of that that that parade it is that we are committed to genuinely pursue assets in the united states that's what our passed he has defaulted in bankruptcy and as a result basically we're in this sort of you know perpetual situation where it can't be it can't be enforced but nevertheless the fact of the matter is is that new york is supposed because because the debtor will never be able to be restored in bonus because he's never he's never complied he thought that you never complied with the bankruptcy procedures of bankruptcy so as a result the bankruptcy will be will be open in  recognition the italian bankruptcy court order is judgment call as you pointed out the the issue is that by recognizing those judgments here it would absolutely give those two bankruptcy orders greater force than they would have in italy to respond to a few points that mr moscowitz had made the subsequent proceeding that would have to happen in order to  enforceable judgment in italy which he describes as ministerial a formality and to which there is no defense is not at all supported in the record mr trianon who already explained that those asserted and i am quoting the proceeding unfolds as an ordinary civil action with the burden of proof on the claimant it is not a mere formality it is a requirement in order executor is that there was a court order that gave those judgments the ability to be executed upon which is precisely what's missing here and what can be up to in that the italian experts acknowledge that the bankruptcy proceeding itself isn't enforceable chris isn't forcible within the bankruptcy it determines the distribution of claims within the bankruptcy but but that outside of the bankruptcy both the italian bankruptcy act and decisions by the italian supreme court confirm that outside of bankruptcy more  enforceable judgment just like that when the proceedings are still going on in bankruptcy lest you circumvent the bankruptcy and seize assets in italy and on the other hand it would seem that i and maybe the expert reports address this or maybe they don't whether as a practical know when i'm just again thinking as an american lawyer in an american bankruptcy if i hadn't allowed plame of the bankruptcy or proceedings of bankruptcy state what's going on and if i said well i want to take this document to italy i think i don't know what the court would do is there anything in the record that addresses whether as a practical matter it would be possible to get proceeding and i and to be honest i don't know whether our italian law has a provision to seek relief from the state that's in place now it very well may the bank obviously never raised this issue below so it wasn't experts both address the fact that once the proceeding ends there is no sop or to not eat a file a nd action or an actual a lawsuit some form in order to get a judgment so i i think that the  argument that's being made and once it's on rebuttal but i believe the argument that he's making is that because of this wrongdoing by mr mann goni somehow that somehow means he's the bankruptcy can  limbo phase it isn't really any situation of its own making the bank is the one of course that brought the bankruptcy proceeding in the st place and the bank as part of the creditors committee determined not to pursue the new york assets as part of the bankruptcy so i appreciate mr moscowitz this position that the bank now has to wait until the bankruptcy concludes before he can st see how much actually the bank has recovered and what claim is left and then decide how to best proceed against either the remaining  bringing the breach of contract action and since and executing on any judgment that results and as to the former that he has to do in italy once he gets a judgment then he can enforce wherever the assets may be found but the fact that some of these underlying documents require execution where assets are located doesn't mean that  i suppose that that isn't the issue that the bank raised the issue that the bank raised is whether he would recover because the claim has always been that he lied to the bank could recover nothing as a factual matter think that has on this issue of the indefinite bankruptcy if you could why in the record to either your expert somewhere in the record where that was addressed that this this given the circumstances now out of this entire bankruptcy never  thirteen million seven hundred and ninety four thousand euro is is that is that still available for collection well but judge an f for seventy nine dollars it was so says at present file a lawsuit and seek a judgment they put the letter into bankruptcy right but that's correct because he defaulted on of the loans and then chose exclude the united states assets from the bankruptcy proceeding all his assets as he was required to do then we would be in the situation but he thought to do that and the by the way just with regard to what mr palmer said if you look at the judgment there's absolutely no question that mr ma