private sector and then it takes two years or so before this finally a hearing before a justice center l j who's who's a just a sort of lawyer in the small agency that happened there i don't understand there's a lot in the complaint about claims of race discrimination by the director of nursing but ultimately they remove your your client until until the western medical center folks were the ones that he ended the case over to just the center they wait they suspended my client right away and what the justices are made its own independent determination they determined i think you can correct me if i'm wrong your client conceded that he left the patient alone he says that he didn't come back quickly was because he got into a fight with another patient but that justice center said in their findings that was that would have been clear we don't even have any humans are from the western medical center so basically it allows the justice center to do its dirty work to be the tool for discrimination and this happen have a representing the justice center a defendant's mr group yes may please the court mark groups for the justice center defendants the district court correctly dismissed plaintiff's claims to claims against the justice center or claims arising under state law and the federal claims against the individual defendants fail because an injunction directed at future justice center proceedings will offer no relief to plaintiffs whose proceedings have concerning them involves the decisions that they issued and plaintiff's underlying administrative proceedings the executive director is entitled to qualified immunity the justice center procedures did not violate any clearly established precedent is consistent with this court's decision involvement today plaintiffs received adversarial hearings with an opportunity to cross examine present witnesses they receive the opportunity to subpoena additional witnesses and if there were any defects in those proceedings and we do we say they're not but if there were any they were entitled to see article seventy eight  have and those articles seventy eight petitions are pending in the rd department and i understand that they are and we anticipate argument in november rd department those articles show further there is no allegations of individual participation in any constitutional and any race discrimination examination as i mentioned they were entitled to cross examine those witnesses that were present bring their own witnesses and subpoena any adverse witnesses that they wanted to cross examine and did not do so  the court has any questions i would be happy to answer them otherwise i adolescent psychiatric department he was not a regular full time employee of west just a medical rather he was an agency or at least employee provided to the hospital by diamond health care in may two thousand  sixteen so it was involved in an incident which resulted in a new york state justice center investigation into claims of haitian abuse and neglect salue was suspended pending the investigation and then upon the justice note the complaint makes no allegations as to whether dimond so what to assign salue elsewhere are other otherwise terminated his employment a diamond was a defendant earlier in this case  submit the decision of the district court this dismissing saloons claims of racial discrimination against westchester medical was proper and should be upheld specifically  claims fail because nowhere in the complaint does he make any allegation tending to show that westchester medical's decision to tell diamond it no longer wanted him assigned to the facility african americans being treated differently in similar circumstances specifically nowhere d as he alleged that a similar least or agency employee non empty not african american was not terminated or separated upon a finding of patient neglect even more so he does not even mention any regular full time employee of less just a medical center both are relevant and conclusory in some he makes no allegations tending to show that he was treated differently because of his race and finally your honor is as kind of indicated as shown in appellant's argument he seems to keep on arguing that you know mr sulu didn't do it or it wasn't a proper finding as i think the quote wells well knows in a discrimination inquiry an employer's decision can be good or bad the proper inquiry is whether it was motivated by race and he probably makes no allegation tending to show any racial motivation and so accordingly the district court's decision was proper and should be upheld i thank you mr parks mr diedrich you have three minutes of all time and your judge i disagree could argue that your are because because for example the internal policy of this one on one policy it's an internal hospital policy it's not a regulation state regulation there's no reason to believe that taking your