and i guess this is an asset to the city given the increasing rise of identity theft and the knowledge that people are are taking identify trying information from driver's licenses and security it would seem that if there was inconsistent information that would not be ordinarily found on the driver's license  the court michael j logan representing the county of orange if your arse with notice we have two parties here i represent the county of orange the agency that actually issued the original warrant and ms barker represents the city of los angeles and we've agreed to split our time and unless there's a specific request by the court i will go first one of the things that became clear to me when i began my review in preparation for this argument i was the one that actually prepared filed a motion for summary judgment and in review of my motion for summary judgment  initially it appears to me that i thought there was something that was pretty clear in my mind and that i expressed in the motion that on reread it may not necessarily be that clear and i want to make sure that we do understand what the allegations these various agencies are the person at a complaint has allegations against the city of los angeles through two individual officers under three causes of action for state issues it has a cause of action against the u immigration service and i believe the city of orange is the authorities not in this case nor is the immigration service we're left with just the city of los angeles and the county of orange original complaint to county of los angeles was actually involved because as you can see through the history of the factual scenario that has been painted in all of these groups mr fulgencio was taken by the city of los angeles down to the how do you go saying it was held there for a few days and eventually was transferred to the county of orange and that's who i represent so the allegations when you review the allegations in the first met of complaint they are very specific as to the county of orange and those allegations are is that there is policies and practices in place in the county of orange regarding the preparation promulgating and dissemination of felony warrants that's the if stand there are roughly two paragraphs that deal with just those allegations when you deal with allegations against the city of los angeles the county of los angeles the city of orange and the nationals immigration service there are very different they talk about the policies that are in place to improperly or in adequately that's another issue that when we look at the issues in the complaint there is actually no allegation regarding detainment after the arraignment the once we decided to do our motion for summary judgment the faction supported the motion or based upon the discovery that we had done during the course of the case no depositions have been taken on factual issues to the positions have been taken experts but the only discovery and we have included it in our factual presentation is responses to iraq authorities that we specifically asked the point of to identify faction support of these claims and they specifically addressed three questions regarding the validity of the warrant the department report that entails iranians information of which then the county has no way to verify because that information is passed through when he's arrested or when he is brought in and processed through the county system the county of orange th of policies that are in place and we have pages of those policies that clearly indicate the procedures to identify the right person now perhaps the words identity theft are not encompass in those procedures but i don't think that's necessarily required if the procedures themselves are broad enough to include that type of evaluation where you have two people with the thing named both who have criminal records in the systems that are already there and that that evidence is in the record our plaintiffs does have a criminal record his information is in there the person we were seeking and under the warrant has a criminal record his information was allegation has to be that there is a policy or practice or custom that's the cause of the constitutional violation i'm not mistaken that's right and i gather your your your point that there is a dispatch do not support  constitutional violation or is your point that they cannot identify a policy or practice or custom that gives that would cause the alleged constitutional violation which as i understand is actually the seizure and that continued detention i guess is the one where you come out what's your what's your point i guess it could be a couple of things we address the issues of the issuance of the warrant and whether or not that warrant is identification of people who were arrested pursuant to a validly issued warrant the question is can you have a constitutional deprivation over an extended period of time it sounds like you can depending on how long it is we have serious series of cases who talked about times longer than those where the person is arrested pursuant to a valid warrant so i don't believe that's the issue here i think what she is arguing is that that there is a policy in place is it is just in one statement in the opposition it is not in my reply it was not breathed it was not argued during oral argument yet it pops up in the opinion and then more important it doesn't show up as an issue that the plaintiff has addressed in city and i think it's been mentioned but just to make sure that we're clear the warrant was issued by the county of orange the appellant here arrived in the l a x and was initially detained by the ins or by the immigration the same birthday the same name which was quite an unusual name the same identifying characteristics with regards to height and weight although i guess there was a five pound difference was the only difference it is when you have you know it's a to tell you the circumstances issue or test that you know you look at there's several cases that talk about like the brown have seen case for example you had a warrant that was issued for a black male detailed information do they have when they actually you know go out to the site to rest somebody pursuant to a warrant that's in the system my understanding is that that what they would rely on in that circumstance and what's in the record the information if you look at the top of that document it was printed and on it looks like the date of the arrest and twenty one hours of this was what was print something that is sometimes confusing but i think that that is one factor that needs to be looked at and weighed against all these other factors when you have somebody with such an unusual name the date of birth there's no you know this evidence indicates that they have the right guy these kind of issues like looking into the background looking doing a for their investigation doing a thing or printing those are the kind of things that come out through the judicial process and that's constitutional violation here like the district court found correct there is it did the officers move for qualified immunity what they did is they joined the county's motion and in their joint your notice they specif