may please the court on behalf of mr gerry then goes in the foreign arbitration order issued against mr jim goshen should not have been recognized conform confirmed or enforced because reasonable notice of the arbitrary trader appointment and of the proceedings was not provided and the arbitrator that was appointed was not appointed pursuant to the contract the parties agreement which was the nation agreements in addition the award should not have been enforced because it was against public policy of the united states because the arbitrator did not disclose extensive financial affiliations with the linley petitioners before the arbitration of the dispute and he did not conduct a hearing or otherwise basis decision on evidence as opposed to mere representations of counsel when it turned first to reasonable notice there's two aspects to reasonable notice the first is the content and timing of the notice interestingly and importantly the notice that should have been sent to mr jim goshen was not that was the notice of the charging document the demand for arbitration the notice that the proceedings were going to be held in england before the t b a in england as opposed to the dva in ireland or the united states that had some connection to th s those two documents of the documents that needed to be served on mr jim goshi and were not the rest of the documents were irrelevant to the question about whether or not mr jim goshen could have actually had some kind of ability to respond that's the case that i submitted from the tenth circuit in connection with its new authority point out that sent a notice on the eighteenth of february then it was on the twenty sixth of february neither of those notices was sufficient because all those notices did was say first the first one was just a demand for payment in the second was where would you like to agree to an arb but you had you had notice that was given to him and they tried various ways of getting a hold of him they tried various ways but none of those actually satisfy due process you know what what what why not because he never received in the way that we were i'm sorry what case tells us that he has to actually receive them what was not reasonably calculated to advise your client the notice that should have been provided was either personal service or some type of an order and where were they where would they have served in the shower served it in his home they had his home address and they did not serve in his did and mail it to his home mr jim goes and it was undisputed they had some address and in fact i think they were actually served him they tried to serve him at his home address when they when the when they actually were doing the confirmation proceeding so they tried to serve him there they didn't get in there so they actually i think y your client provided you know address and that c i just they used in the agreements right yes but they also knew that he had a home address and they didn't give him they didn't serve him at the home address why wouldn't they believe why wouldn't the reason we calculated to reach him at the address that he provided for by position as it's can that says constructive notice the point here is that essentially you're getting into fall judgment against somebody it's equivalent of essential quillan of having a default judgment entered against you without having proper s real service of process like you would in this country which is what you're entitle to your title to due process if a default judgment is entered against you in this country there's two things when you get it you get personal service and two you get approval appearing they were not emails that had been regularly sent back and forth to him seems like used to making a lot of effort to avoid service process here am going to move on then to the next  ok i mean i'm telling you that they are given if they did not get the particular known as it's needed to get and didn't get the charging document so he had no time to object to the location of the arbitration or the arbitrator or to help to the arbitrator right and said what's the next argument the next argument is that the location of the arbitration was incorrect the composition of the panel the arbitration provision in many thoroughbred breeder associations in this country as one in england yes but that had no connection with this dispute there's one in ireland and there's one in california the district court acknowledged that there were more than one t supplemental excerpts of record numbers page thirteen the nomination agreements were executed in the republic of ireland the staffing is that was the subject of the agreements were all located in ireland the merits were bred to those  about the country and you talk about a t b a that your client might well have welcomed the opportunity of conducting an arbitration someplace other than ireland when he was dealing with an irish corporation on i or an eye on forces in ireland it seems to me that he might well connections to thoroughbred breeders in ireland but he read it with personal jurisdiction with respect to something in ireland there's no personal jurisdiction with respect to something in england it's as if you went to him but to why would that be appropriate there is no connection supposed to be appointed when they wrote to the thoroughbred breeders association of england they asked for an irish arbitrator the third day breeders of socialization of england did not appoint for some reason we don't know about this this whole thing they appointed somebody in england who has deep connections to kumar which is linley investments deep connections deep financial ties and relationships the other argument that we have made is that the pump addition as that there was no notice of a hearing and then with no hearing of the arbitrators made the decision based upon the representations of counsel would not submit and i understand that there could have been submissions based upon declarations by the parties but there were no party declarations this was simply representations of counsel did your client state in his declaration that there is no but to his knowledge there was no t b a in ireland yes you did ok mean now i'm really confused counsel well you know why your why is your client objecting when they went to somebody else and ireland if to his knowledge there is no t v in ireland but there is a t v in ireland he wanted to go the t b a in the united states but he would have taken ireland i'd like to preserve the remaining time all right appellant shows and demonstrates on the record that one of the expressly enumerated defenses appear here it appears they are contesting the reasonable of this of notice they are contesting whether the notice can only be accomplished by personal notice or an admission of actual notice that is inconsistent with my lane in the string of cases that cite that where the notice given here and in all cases should be reasonably calculated under all the facts and circumstances to apprise the appellant of the dependency of the action and the opportunity to participate here pelleas employed the same communications that they had used to communicate with the appellate for the years that they have been doing business with them that is the e mail address which is jammer nine nine nine the fax number and appear throughout the records and the they're all the same form the phrase the third red breeders association appears six times in each of those agreements letterhead is thorough bred readers association the declaration of christie grass like the manager of the coolmore operation ireland found on as supplemental excerpts of page thirty nine  custom and practice for dealing with arbitration related to spew it's under these contracts and they do hundreds of them every year is to contact thoroughbred from his association in which happens we had headquartered ireland and throughout the united kingdom i don't believe there's an comment on that on the record you'll find that in addition to mr john birch and address in all fourteen nomination that paragraph fourteen of each nomination agreement in chains an arbitration clause in the arbitration clause frees the parties up to agree to arbitrate their matter anywhere they choose with anyone they choose and it does not come into play unless they can't agree on an arbitrator and in that case in only that case either party can petition the council for the thurber breeder's association again we know the custom and practice is the one located in england and they can request that they appoint an arbitrator which is exactly what happened here with respect to notice i think it's important to highlight some of the  it's going to take years to get this paid and by the way and this is crucial to the notice requirement by the way don't contact me anymore i'm now represented by mr ron cass well all your communication should go to him and  he sent fourteen separate letters to the p o box that's in every arbitration agreement and he also sent them to the jammer nine nine nine email address then being used in the communications and were in fact used appellant himself in delivering those december emails advising them first he's going to pay second he's never going to pay that's the custom and practice of how they were dealing with your charter ten days ten days later the attorney for the appellee notified the appellant that ok these are three arbitrators in ireland if you want ireland that we would agree or if you don't like them why don't you nominate someone in ireland otherwise in twenty eight days as indicated in paragraph fourteen in each and every nomination agreement will have to apply to the thoroughbred breeders association and let them pick that's what happened that's crucial here is this time after the february twenty eighth letters again fourteen to the pellet at his email address and his appeal box and fourteen to his attorney at his email address appeal box this time the appellant attorney responded on march eleventh two thousand and ten and he says i'm not representing the appellant anymore please don't for me anymore notices i will simply discard them the appellate in the district court level sided declaration that says i never authorized that attorney to represent me he is not authorized to do deal with with this time period was already late with his payment to do all the communications through his attorney at that point the pelleas contacted the third breeders association although letterhead from them says they were bred breeders association and then the arbitrator also did notice is that were reasonably calculated to give the appellate notice of the pendency of the action by sitting him a letter on june seventh two thousand and ten he sent him when he didn't hear from him in a month and a half he sent another letter and you'll see in the chart in the in the brief you sent it by me on he sent it by e mail which was noted to be received and he sent it by facts which it was noted to to have gone address went out and there was an abundance of effort by the a pelleas to give him notice this is in contrast to the c case that was cited in the supplemental root to see case that that the  appellant with reasonable notice so that they can be heard and present their case however once they do that it is the appellant's responsibility to avail themselves of that opportunity be showing that you are unable to participate is not the same as being unwilling to participate avoiding an arbitration and ignoring the process is not enough to to create an enumerated defen with respect to the second allegation that these these proceedings were inconsistent with the fourteen nomination agreements i would refer you to the nomination agreements it sets forth the process if you don't like going  somebody have at it there's no showing that this gentleman was hand selected he was not one of the three that he had suggested to the third grade preachers association it was rejected in terms of bias there's been no shown that there was no financial relationship or connection between the the arbitrator and the pelleas there had never been any payment for services or payment for horses or horse transaction between the two and there was no business interest between the two of them they could be found there was simply no connection it was said and brandeis is a case of everybody cited that in these small insular businesses like that there are good breeding operation the fact th parties cross wigs they deal in the same circles is not evidence of an appearance of bias and we would agree with that in the photo prone case in terms of public policy the court as it's directed to invalidate sparingly when foreign states unless the judgment violates the notion of morality and justice in the foreign state so we would ask that you confirm the district court's ruling we believe that notice was given an abundance of notice was given in the manner that the appellant themselves directed and in the manner that the pellet themselves chose to communicate there is no evidence in the record that the appellate he's ever had his home address that was done through some of investigation at the time we had to personally serve him with this petition and even we certain that the address you don't have any questions that's it for me i'm just thinking counsel on the merits we were concerned this morning because we could not you were here and we couldn't locate you i apologize to the court i was in the wrong courtroom i the district court found that the agreement was ambiguous and that determination and the if he found that there war many agreements only many t being that determination is entitled to deference because and reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard he also confirmed the arbitration award he did but that my point about that is he yes and that decision is reviewed you know factual findings the legal finding is review do novo and the factual findings which this was is reviewed to determine whether it's clearly erroneous or not and i'm saying that he determined the contract was ambiguous he then though determined that might as well let the people decide because it's ambiguous you can just let the petitioners decide where they feel like filing it can be in any t v at all this particular dispute had no connection to england and that is why we are objecting to that with respect to bias the standard is not we're not talking about