i'm david f run for the appellants if the court will allow me to i would like to reserve the last five minutes of my time for rebuttal yes thank you i'd like to first talk about the shorter issues those of the bunco before our trust we believe that the district court heard when it ruled that in bankruptcy secondly for the film the must think the bankrupt admitted that the trust funds intended beneficiaries are medical malpractise claimants and finally the law of the land opponents that represent which is clear and secondly that the judgment also finds that they did not have to go and exhaust the state remedy which the bank alleged was going to the administrative remedy secondly the case the issue came up as to whether the administrative remedy had to be exhausted with the insurance commissioner so what we did is because we know that this was coming up in case so what we did was basically try to be more rather than creating another situation another another issuance commissioner situation we try to be we tr minors of the time and who were not mentioned in the original suit two thousand the two thousand and seven suit was taken care of by the bankruptcy court or in the subsequent settlement the law in puerto rico they were not mention of the and and or maybe sister in that condition or basically they didn't suffer any direct damage caused by going to practice of course but siblings are allowed to claim in puerto rico for pain and suffering and the damages of others to whatever the jury awards them they would then be victims of them upright as well in addition they are also suing the foundation which is the owner of the hospital for vicarious liability so as to whether the the malpractise claimants motion not to allow the bankruptcy filing to go forward they had to make a determination as to whether remains that under puerto rico law who simply had to have representation of their own as miners so that their interests could be properly protected in the proceedings and i think has his that in these case and so mismanaged the self insurance trust fund that they were not enough assets in the trust fund to satisfy the judgment when you agreed that under those circumstances the that we're we have totally new parties in this case that the the the people we're representing are miners that were not part of the case previously and out and whose whose interests were not disposed  because he just stumps them as the very appears in question what she was when she asked about  there was some argument as to why the bankruptcy had not been approved hadn't even been approved because about practice claimants alleged it was fraud we withdrew the fraud clean and we agreed to an him or any other third party in order to pursue the claim or deficiency that's a page three forty eight of our of our appendix the getting rico and in light of the provisions of said code the administrative entity determined that it does not have jurisdiction because of that there is no claim and there's no defense that we needed to exhaust truth should also be exposed to life guilty as the owner of the premises and you have had every opportunity to make that argument did not convince the court so you should not now be just become thomas even in the even in the settlement agreement which you will see in the appendix is if the caption still says of us at that and i explained it to my grief at that settlement agreement the lawyers for the hospital show up and say we're a corporation it's easier if we pay out to them as basically what they were going to do what they actually did was make one payment and the bankruptcy of that corporation in should we