knowing on a not for the contract that you have with the government pursuant to whatever we are specifically challenging a regulation a breach of contract action before the federal claims court would not reach that regulation whatever you are claiming a breach of the contract by virtue of the fact that the government has improperly offset payments that are otherwise due and owing under the new contract for debts that were in their lives you heard by some of the principal to which an individual is entitled under the law is not a claim for money damages money damages or substitution for something an individual was entitled to we are not seeking a substitution and in fact we have not made any claim for money we have asked for an the court appointed couldn't reach the issue that you're really challenging which is the regulation of the statute the secretary's authority and i'm saying under the or action l of the federal circuit in consolidated edison which is the case it's quite claims court could do is turn the money back that's it not as i know this but this federal circuit says that then is effectively a race judicata on the issue of future relief so you if you create any sort of absolute jurisdiction in the claims court for four actions and ten thousand dollars and i will tell this court actually not to tell you how much money is owed to these people i don't know this the government has presented their list  federal court of claims does not have exclusive jurisdiction what the court of claims might have jurisdiction for other things this place is not a case for money damages therefore the district clerk at the district court has jurisdiction under the proceeded in federal district court under the judicial review commissions and the a p a there has not been and i will tell you in the beginning there were questions about whether or not that was money damages and there were challenges the other two problems i'm not aware of there having been a great deal of litigation upon because there is not an adequate remedy because we are seeking prospective relief we're seeking an injunction we're seeking a death at the our commitment you know are you familiar with consolidated you're ok explain to me by that reasoning doesn't apply because as i understand it what the federal circuit is it is what you're proceeding on a contract you want the offset declared improper so that you can get your full if you want i understand the question and if the full tones are granted to you that's right through to coddle on the government's perspective because we are not proceeding  conservation reserve program contracts disaster assistance program does not involve a contract market loss is just a program does not involve a contract and then of the other programs which might be impacted by this regulation involve a contract while those two programs do involve a contract their contracts they are not negotiated contracts they are contracts that he should and all the terms of the contract are governed by statute and so what we're dealing with are statutory entitlements not negotiated contract benefits statute the contract is just a mechanism by which i sign up for the program that's it just like if i if i took somebodies application for so security not ripped it out but that isn't the whole purpose of conferring jurisdiction in the court of federal claims to make congress has identified a single court which shall serve as the judicial forum for adjudication of claims against the public fit and however artfully you draft your complaint if at the end of the day what we're talking about here is money that's coming out of the coffers of the united states congress and says that's where you go guarding a p a review ability the issue the only issue that has ever been there is the check or at claim for money damages the issues regarding and because they're like i'm sorry there yes your honor because while i understand that your honor is saying that a federal claims court might be able to issue really that that provides race judicata however it will not provide prospective relief for the application of this pacific regulation in general well no but you can't complain if you're complaining about the people that you represent and you can release for them right yes your honor well again the point is you can't complain about anything other than what you've complained about in this law and we have complained that that regulation operates is an uncanny situational regulation may please the court i'm august for energy with the justice department here only after secretary of agriculture i was going to focus on that the takings aspect of the impact on appellate jurisdiction here at the court seems more district court's jurisdiction to hear contract and takings claims for compensation that are under ten thousand dollars however if a complaint is based in part on that jurisdiction the appeal goes to the federal circuit here the simplest way to resolve this case i believe is that the plaintiff has alleged that there's a taking and has sought compensation for that taking and that is a claim that clearly would fall under the little talker act under this court's  aspect of that that is seeking compensation for taking the claims court that case involved with leave more than ten thousand dollars is the proper course for that claim here because some of these claims are under ten thousand  that i don't have the side on me but i know that the federal circuit has dealt with cases involving the c c c administration of contracts in the past and of course taking place cases historically have always gone to the  claims court that's based on the fact that you can't really get an a p a remedy for taking because there's nothing wrong with the government taking property all it has to do is provide a procedure for just compensation and that procedure is circuit the federal circuit might then decide that some of the claims need to be brought in the claims court in the first instance those seeking more than ten thousand dollars and then presumably could resolve the claims for under ten thousand dollars under the consolidated edison case which th court noted to the other side in a cases where you have sort of ongoing obligations that are based on contract or federal claims court or the federal circuit can provide an adequate remedy what they do i that they require the return of funds and that would kind of work as a declaratory judgment to prevent the government from taking those funds in the future they would basically have a dispositive resolution of that issue in the in the court where those claims will be made the other states cited the eastern enterprises cases as supporting the notion that you can bring in takings claims and under section thirteen thirty one and certain instances that claim is that case is readily distinguishable for a couple reasons first the statutes that issue there require the transfer of money to a third party a private party so you you cannot obtain just compensation in that circumstance because the money was not going to the government was going to the third party by statutory requirements so the only the court could presumed that there was no adequate there was no just compensation remedy under the  all other the final factor in the tucson airport authority is whether the remedies implied leap or expressly prohibited under the a p a and here you would have a situation almost exactly like the facts in tucson airport where you have a a damages i know that they're praying it is not a suit for money damages but to the extent their claims are based on contract or on the takings clause the only relief available is a damages remedy against the government had the secretary sent notice as they were required and headed they provide an appeal process as they were required unquestionably review of those decisions would be before the district court the fact that they did not does not change the jurisdiction of the to the federal circuit and that issue would be up to the federal circuit wouldn't your honor i don't believe in a transfer would be appropriate i think the jurisdiction is well i think i know you do but if it work ransford then we would not monkey around