to grant relief in this particular matter on three different bases one would be to either remand the matter of the low for a new trial to the bench the other one would be to remain the matter whether directed instructions for a directed verdict the other one would be for a new trial or jury these are of course in the alternative there are seven issues presented in front of the court at this particular point i will focus primarily on the for about ten years that is correct twenty five year employee twenty five year or so on employment with the district that is correct she was transferred about seven times and seven times during the course of her tenure as administrator the latest one coming at the end of going to have a jury that have nineteen page twenty three on the transcript yes that sounds about right on where the motion but the most well yawn of the motion first and foremost the court asked us at that time what issues were all that we get to do to discuss those particular issues that was also discussed at the initial sixteen conference that i believe in may of two thousand and two did you ever make any more of did your anyone on retaliation to also having its counterpart which is the arizona civil rights act and then having to read ok that's but that's the federal rehabilitation act ok so you went from going from an eighty a complaint to to an eighty eight plus rehabilitation did your case preparation changed because you thought this was an injury trial presentation change because somehow you didn't have a chance to prepare knowing that it might be  rule thirty nine seems to say is that a jury trial demand may be endorsed by the pleading says nothing about how it has to be stated under certain customs that have grown up but there's nothing in the rule that says it has to be presented in such  i'm now on page eight and nine of the complaints count one damages jury not there mentioned now the word count request is there i doubt us cash much importance the difference between one request and the word demand but we do have a request and they want money as a jury would award now i understand this is not the normal way to do it in federal court and i understand your point that this is a formulaic craze although the formulaic phrase could easily and accomplish the same thing under as on a lie by saying fact  in the middle of a rule anyone see simple question if your statements in your state complaint satisfy rule thirty eight you're fine if they don't you're not form and the question then could be is that what's written here in the state complaint sufficient notice to the adverse party that you want to hear it but i don't i look very hard to find a case that gave me the particulars ok what was actually stand in the complaint to the you know was or was not sufficient and the case was pretty silent actually it's frustrating for me to try and find cases that actually told me what was or was not in the complaint and simply refer to rule thirty eight and think about whether you had had requests properly requested and endorsed a demand for a jury in your in your complaint but there's it's not there's a comma there and then it says if the parties demand they're for it's served says if you properly filed in state court a demand for a jury then you don't have to you don't have to do anything further you did not do that which means that that first sentence says if you're entitled to a jury ten days after you've asked the case is removed you have to file a demand for a jury if you're entitled to one but you didn't do that i don't think th