records to provide the samples to the extent that the insurance company needs to determine whether you have your health enough for them to consider taking the risk on your right mr hooker's the only person who went through this process where he was living is ninety percent of it dried up at him and percentage was afterwards we did not arrest ninety percent but again i think that that's a difference between the police requirements and the proofs if we played ninety percent that doesn't mean from the road to the fact that  as you know that required that the petitioner state with particularity a claim in order to discover the identity of the individuals who they deemed as potential defendants and my client operates as as you know an online chat forum like many others on the internet and it's important to their business that the posters feel free to express opinions on that forum and as the i believe the petition or the  we made the argument as you know in our response free that you know if somehow he was able to get past it done a full identifiable valid business expect to see the posts themselves were not actionable because they were statements of opinion and not false statements of fact but going back to the issue at hand in order to state a claim for i'm tortious interference with prospective advantage under illinois law let's go back one ok yes it would you and also the additional allegation in that amended petition was made on information and believe us just got her anyway so that particular allegation isn't verified either way with a proper from occasion are not and i certainly think that the additional allegation in that amended petition it's insufficient it's not fair fight even if they were out of verification because it's on information belief that paragraph thirty three has to scotland we've made the voluntarily availing himself of the fat wallet for him and it was only then when he was posting on there in attempting to use it to give an inch of the company that they were negative comments that were made and according to  their arguments if if their version of the torah were able to prevail then when anyone searches for anything on the internet then it could be deemed and there was any negative comments made that it could be  it just simply says that it was an online presence and if the individuals were searching with respect to be a lot electronic footprint that somehow there would be a valid business expectancy if that they were somehow going to purchase a personalized wealth management plan but that's just not close enough under illinois law even the cases that they psycho in our favor there had to be a closer business expected to close or contractual relationships just recently where you're saying is you understand situation could be i think that taking i mean there's no allegation here that these individuals were taking specific steps or had purchased personal life wealth management plans in the past most of the cases in illinois have to do with past customers and when they don't have to do with past customers such as the chicago pizza case or the pope in case it has to do with pass enough to maintains and that's just not happening here  there's not time pass customers and they're on facts to show that they were very close to chris to purchasing the size wealth management plan they don't even know the identity of these individuals they said maybe that they have the identity of one of them but that's not here going back to the pleading it just would if this are eight years of law and they haven't said that they've obtained you know they haven't been able to to demonstrate any facts at all to show that they were close to a purchase in order to show up at this in six seconds and i think going on to have nervous wow even though he's named specifically and it's said that he was in the underwriting process there are no allegations file those companies as they admit are completely unrelated there's no evidence that the post knew anything about mercury file there's no mention of mercury filed in the polls so there can't be any sort of inten to interfere with that business expectancy if there was one and going back also to the claim having to do with  the constitutional protection of the pows you know under under law there isn't any illinois law that says that wouldn't be entitled to constitutional protection for the opinions that were stated on the online forum and also not mentioned here there's no i'm pleading malice on the part of the n p c even though they said that the prose themselves seem to be malicious on their face the third parties who actually contemplating contemplating entering into a specific business relationship and that there was a reasonable expectation of such a contract and that just hasn't been played here those who may have searched even tho o i don't know if they're unrelated companies i mean i can only speculate i'm not sure how or why or who removed her i don't see anything about it in any of the posts i mean the posts just have negative and they are negative opinions and it does have but on the internet there are different types of claims perhaps and if that might address certain negative comments on the internet but not these because they're simply statements of the are not fal