which the prisoners or the civil detainees were exposed to the stories were different so there were there were a lot of differences i think you you would acknowledge that rder amongst other legal authorities clearly established right was the right to be protected from heightened exposure to valley fever and while it only technically applied to the neighboring facility in an additional  you'll see our decision the court ruled that whether the county had any authority to prevent the state of california from building c s h requires a more developed actual record and that should be addressed at a later stage in the pleading and that the th amendment is not our suit against even that one mister stafford was required to be placed at the hospital by state law to the conditions of the hospital were different than at the nearby prison where there was a valid outbreak and three where the hospital is located in a the clearly established prong of of the immunity because what we're looking at is st is there any actual present point regarding the exposure levels to valley fever and secondly whether it would be reasonable for officials to believe that housing mister stafford at a psychiatric hospital in the endemic region was lawful under the circumstances given the circumstances and given th and there are several reasons for why it would be reasonable and mister stafford concedes that there is no binding authority that is on point with respect to valley fever and so the only  particular circumstances that in conditions that existed and pleasant valley say hospital using pleasant valley state prison and having all state prisons only these two institutions and the order itself drew distinctions between this conditions at pleasant valley and the conditions at well a state hospital and just as just let you mention before their order noted that there was a substantially lower risk of valley fever infection rate at the addition the court laid out very specific findings regarding the conditions that existed at the prison and this was based on the receivers policy which was a race based exclusion policy for pleasant valley and have been al uncontrolled for eight years and they have not been able to decrease those rates and so one of the things that the court noted in fact is that the prisons should have investigated why c s h had such lower rates of infection and i noted that the they looked at the air conditioning system but decided it was too expensive to implement a similar type of system at the prison so the part of the order itself distinguishes between the conditions that cognizable claim based on exposure to the heightened risk of exposure to valley fever so looking at those things together reasonable officials could believe that housing mister stafford at the but the court with all the say that the allegations themselves also failed to adequately a ledger claim because it was well established at the time that merely alleging a high his case out of what had already been established as the types of allegations that cannot see a claim based on exposure to valley fever and as i mentioned at that time in twenty four dollars teams there were only two his so it's not necessary ultimately for the court to determine the whether or not mister starr's allegations adequately state constitutional violation because there is no clearly established right and that of these supervisory level defendants and this really this case is really the mirror image of hide your st hunter where this court reversed is usually concluded that the allegation is very similar types of allegations regarding policymakers failed state claimant of the ball state and the allegations are very similar that policymakers implemented policies there were very general but for example forcible order i do not represent the present board of supervisors yams we only i only represent the state defendants from their former director pam all in for the department of state hospitals and we do not brief the issue arguments made by the defense st of all it with respect to central valley residents and valley fever as joe johnson pointed out there is the freedom of motion issue as well as on the other order african americans are