cannot hear the critical fact that the district court i think did not fully come to grips with was that ron was seeking and continues to see an exclusion order in the international trade commission that would mean that the exclusion of the handset into effect that would immediately begin to cause the live virus harm and this is and if it rains next year somebody will get wet i mean the whole point it seemed to me of the trial judge's exercise of discretion seemed to be to say wait a minute there's a lot of ifs in all of this what's the hurry i think that if you review what the district court said in the transcript the district court referred to some of these issues when talking about the decision this court determined that that state and not be lifted until all appeals are exhausted from the i t c proceeding so there we have absolutely no opportunity in that case to vindicate what it is that one of the district court judge this court recognized and was wrong for maintaining that once the requirement for jurisdiction are mad and they were met here really for a reason that the district court is not fully appreciate that the existence of the threat of an exclusion order and th virginia and we could very well be in a situation that would have been able to obtain a finding that education about the validity of the patents and our and the the not infringement of our activities with respect to tax and now you're going back to judge a long as the run that he doesn't keep you from importing your product isn't that right and it's also the case that that won't matter in the later who dish will process well as your own with respect to the international trade commission for  it is true that our interest there is in our principal interest there to your interest to the other but certainly much more tenured are in our principal interest with regard to the international trade commission is that we continue to be able to report the assuming that if the district court did have if we were to reverse the district court and say she abused her discretion that you'd be able to compel her to go forward immediately without saying that time in any of the proceeds to your telling us that even if we sent it back and she says ok i'll assert jurisdiction but i'm going to stay at pending the i p c and or the california court you would be able to come up here and tell us that she abused her discretion well believe that we discretion is before us really if you're that true if the trial court is without there is diction how do we reach the question of the exercise of discretion which could only be exercised if he has jurisdiction which leads me then to the question even if we thought your case had merit that we have to send this back to the trial judge to re examine the jurisdiction of the issue in the light of like questions when we reach the question of the proper exercise of discretion which is less sure i want to come back to than just let it without reaching the jurisdiction question that helps you for example if if one of my children misbehave and i choose to spank the child for that misbehavior but my neighbor who has a child  equally chooses not to spank the child i don't see how my exercise of discretion to do something in the lightens us about my neighbor's decision can you explain that to me i just don't see how plumpy help her words well here i think that the the primary reason that we brought on take this to the attention of the court was that the fact that the the conduct of the third party meaning of discretion is that we could sit here and affirm the trial judge either way i agree with you your honor but my point about discretion is that in this case the only thing that the district past that were not in the record that somehow polluted city which is very clear that she understood that if she was wrong on prescription she still apply moral factors of discretion and she identified the reasons why why  going on there on the same happens on the same issues their vote i see proceeding and california federal court proceeding on same sex and variety is a party to one of those threatened we have never sent those since letter we've never asked them to take a license they have never come to us for a license and been turned down in fact we have never sued in the downstream possum or similar situation as never th in their eyes but you are the robbery but your client is free at the not to turn around tomorrow and sue all of those stunts downstream nuisance out right and you say there's no part of that so you could have the exact situation that you're talking about that you suggest is impossible which is that you have five hundred different proceedings going on at one time because you've brought suit in all of those jurisdictions to vindicate your rights with respect to each of the different defend right so what's the difference the difference there is th the argument you're making you made very nicely in your brief you read brief and you make the following statement after saying that hundreds of millions of sellers who uses a product could in theory claim that they would be wrong you then say to be sure there may be a difference of scale of arising as a very large seller of cellphone handsets but there is no difference in principle well in the exercise of discretion as to whether to do something is really a question of principle or is it indeed a question of scale that is to say isn't scale relevant to the question of whether somebody should have a right to protect themselves to a certain service opportunity not a right mr pena respond to that very last point which i think is rather a difficult one from your side that is aren't you really trying to do it and around the statute that said hold everything up no general principle of district court proceeding should be stated this is a provision that was put in in essence to try to accommodate that interest of foreign respondents who didn't want to have to litigate  so i don't think that that is and the reason for the court to go to decline to exercise its jurisdiction here the other point that i think is worth responding to is this it's worth something about a strong about the possibility of a great multipl