is there anything counsel about the franklin case that you would like to argue that we have not discussed in the broad but i think the franklin case is one of the cases that you we've been talking around as we've been going she was a woman who was out  at the time that the transition was happening learned of the transition request to do an interview because of her health asked to have it done telephonically and then was told shortly thereafter that even though she had an eleven year history with the sacramento job corps no issues on her performance record she was not going to be hired so did you link that to any specific allegations that the reason she was in her list because of her disability yes one of disability discrimination was one of the reasons that that but did you say wes is there any more facts that we know that other people that had anything to do with their disability that other people were treated other eleven your people were treated differently or specifically with ms franklin's complaint what was stated was that she asked for the telephonic interview and got it she got it she had the interview she was told she wasn't hired and that she would be informed as jobs came available that jobs came available she was not contacted she was not offered an opportunity to interview or to get into those positions whereas other people who didn't have outstanding disability issues or medical conditions did basically said i believe that i was discriminated as opposed to any facts that would suggest that there were actually people that were hired into positions for which she was qualified who did not have her same medical condition or similar medical records i don't have the information about all of the hiring that was being done and well that any of it right this is the issue that we have i think with the pleadings in this case say no your honor but i suspect that if what you're trying to say but do you have anything else other than she believes that right now as you said here do you have anything else with her situation what we have is the fact that she was an eleven year employee state in good stead have anything more than you already said can you make an offer proof that you know anything more that another eleven year employee of that was in a similar situation that wasn't just sampled got called and got the position or is all that you know is some positions were failed we don't know anything about it we don't know whether they were disabled we don't know who they are what more do you have i i don't have evidence to present to you today  honor as to who the other people so how long ago did this happen this was two thousand and fourteen so we're getting on to six years and we just don't have any more this case never got into a discovery  well you have eight clients some of whom work there some of whom say at least at the time of filing the briefs still work there if there were any plausible facts wouldn't you have been able to find and i would say that beyond the cases that we have here i have another three cases against the same employer regarding also people dealing with race a health condition but the pleadings in those cases i'm not sure would be appropriate to provide in this case as well as some sort of support as an r c so and so was also treated badly and therefore it's evidence  i was treated badly on the song but if everyone just believes that but you can't but you can't show anything of people that actually got positions that you know say if you say well i think i you know i was discriminate doesn't it doesn't add anything it doesn't elevate the pleating the court mentioned miss taylor and miss taylor was the union president at the time and she made complaints regarding what had been happening with the individuals and it's no action was taken if no investigation was done if they weren't provided a chance to grieve their terminations or their lack of hiring these are all example mr taylor's back there she got her job back and you say she was a union president if anyone would know something she looks like to me like she'd be a gold mine about what's going on there and who got hired and who was filled  for the record john adams were happily out of associates so the allegations are that it appeared to her that carcase now applicants who had disclosed medical conditions were provided with employment the court found that to be insufficient because there was no factual detail establishing that she also didn't allege that those applicants were put into residential advisor positions which was the specific position that she had applied for establish that came she has to show that other non similarly situated individuals were put in the same position that she applied for so there is no additional factual detail to be had here which is why judge only granted the motion without leave to amend and why it would be futile to allow leachman at this point because there is simply nor more meat to put on this ms franklin just took to clarify ms franklin was the employee have nothing else to say i mean i think i think i think the allegations speak for themselves i mean i can address some of the other claims if you'd like to retaliate in claims i don't know if those are especially in doubt the allegations of retaliation were all for complaints that were made after the adverse employment actions were made and therefore don't meet the definition of retaliation the claims for her claim for failure to print discrimination i think the court was very clear about what was actually alleged failure to accommodate she the only accommodations she sought were granted by adams and associates the interactive process claim fails for for copies of employment records claim without beating a dead horse i'm not sure what more to say you don't have to ok i'll save us all two minutes and thirty four seconds reshape that