would have the court's indulgence for just a few minutes for the electronics all right our thanks to staff the automation division and our thanks as well your honor my name is william shawn i represent silverado stages an employee owned company and i'd like to reserve one minute for rebuttal time is one of the issue in this case your honour's is pretty simple and it really is but whether or not the administrative procedure act and its due process protections apply to the proceedings here in which the government the have m c s a posted information violations on its website and added to those violations and information on violations warning symbols warning triangles that in effect operate as a sanction against the carrier for the results of a inspection that occurred  that's correct it's satisfactory and you didn't challenge the interpretation of their own regulations right well you know we you know you you know channels that anywhere we we are challenging yes we are we're as a denial of due process because there is no we by the way true we have an ability to to challenge the violations that are alleged and posted on the website about the collateral proceedings going on in district court here is your arguments there but you're right i did not read your briefs is suggesting that you were in any way challenged you are making some sort of the due process argument but i saw no challenge to proceeding to resolve these issues and in other words it was presented as the answer to the absence of any a three eighty five fifteen proceeding of the point is your honor if it is not agency said this isn't the process for that to happen you have a different process in the in the petition and this judge hale pointed didn't challenge that interpretation of the regulation so i don't understand what it is that you want us to work consistent with how you have violations and other information posted on the website in that proceeding say anywhere it said that proceed yes but under that regulation but the point is a challenge under the s m s procedures your honor is not a proper challenge it is not a viable procedure you're not listening to what too is you saying you haven't explained to us why you can't raise requiring that the s m s procedures result in some kind of a decision still leaves us with a decision that is fundamentally flawed and it's not compliant that's what the district court is for that's where you one hundred thousand dollars we settled for about fifteen thousand dollars and and actually some of the violations that the government and you could've you could've refused to settle with raised all your issues then no your honor w only raise the issues that were brought in that in forcemeat pursuit in how of those any different from the due process or you meet your reason here because due process due process argument we have here is a much broader scope of the government had a narrowly tailored who violations that it sought to prosecute as a for below and in the enforcement proceeding there were many many other violations and of course it didn't even address the issue of the warning symbols that have caused the perrier some substantial loss of business and problems what about his basic or he says i'm sure if you're going he says that's completely inadequate procedure because it's all sort of off in the cyber world and there's no deadline action or track suit and what would that mean it would say if the district court ruled in their favor the district court would say you can see after on requests within q says we're not going to make any change then what is it you know will it once they exhausted his process of course this is the we are there is no exhaustion until daybreak you decide to respond so it could be a decade or i say it's it's six months all right and so for each time it's another six months i mean there's no process here your honor there is a process not yes like foyer we received your letter exactly so that was january it's now december and i still don't have a response so what's the answer the answer is there are more than w is back and forth with the company and the are provided with a copy of the report they can challenge you know raise issues in the report i read was that the federal agency this data cube then is like that chance to depose them and if you can see any information you would like and you are doing fine know what's going on all right so then the state looks at it and says no there's a violation so we're not making any change in the report his requests and says they're related to that issue i don't know how many back office people get you know show us but i can say is that in this case just to emphasize that the agency has actually responded to a number of them already so although there are some that are still with the company said we don't know what you're talking about that wasn't our us you know we've actually got video footage from least ask him or something which shows that it was a different bus company whose most was involved in this incident and somehow you know who was missing identify it's our bus and we want you to fix it  these regulations thirty three eighty five fifteen are obviously flawed they do not provide for due process because there is no ability to reasonably challenge this information that is posted and judge we have many cases the regulation is fundamentally flawed there is no means of challenging this information under what purportedly is a full safety administration proceeding and judge wilkins when you know did that information lee erroneous information could be posted that's exactly what we have in the joint appendix i think it's the minnesota trucking association's comments and they are even after state proceedings were dismissed the agency still refused to review remove that information and to correct the record what we have here is a it's a cyber administration which is completely outside the proper scope of administration we have a system where there are no checks and balances where there is no due process where we've had our important proceedings in our important are yours as they're called before the data queue system in noting that we've lost over twelve million dollars in lost contracts this year because of these flags these warning symbols and there is no expectation no possibility that we know of that we're never going to receive any kind of response this information goes into a black hole it is a clear denial of due process we submit that this court has the authority to strike down these regulations and these practices because they amount to rules and regulations which have never been properly promulgated and we should not have to have individual proceedings before this trick works in seeking mandamus  as an alternative to this court striking down the procedures under a three eighty five fifteen as unlawful because they effectively create a regime without a remedy thank you