aims representing myself it is clear that sanctions cannot rest only a claim being dismissed under twelve b six standard there must be something more that warrants a sanction in this case the district court surely reversed the initial twelve b six dismissal of the magistrate on the claim against spiegel and the district court held that because alston had been allowed to replete other claims that had been dismissed he would it was only fair that he be allowed to repeat his claims against spiegel yeah i don't really consider that a revers case on the grounds that it did not state a claim is not the same thing as saying that it's a frivolous claim in objecting i did object to the magi dismissal of the claim and i brought up the case of ray burst ropes and gray and the district court didn't comment on that case but it was not a case that was ever distinguished of ray which was that threatening to disclose damaging information or disclosing damaging information get deterred someone from making a claim and in my view is that that princip applied to mr spiegel because he was in a position to have access to damaging information about mr alston he claimed to a rd party that he was and that he had access to mr alston's personnel file and that that file contained damaging information so i viewed that as under the principle of pray since ray had not been distinguished by the magistrate judge in a was in my brief to proposed amended complaint against spiegel does not constitute a valid extension of threat do you lose plausibly be extended to justify the assertion of this claim in the face of the earliest dismissal and in the face of your receipt of  other point to is the fact that the district court a year at approx one year after dismissing spiegel concluded that kennedy's or maybe eight of these individual defendants that there was magistrate judge concluded that among the evidence that would support a part of the evidence that would support a conspiracy d was that there were letters circulated negative letters about mr alst by a select board member nancy daley and that that was done the fact the fact is that we allege that that was done in concert with mr spiegel and then after that happened mr spiegel engaged in this conduct in this life board's hearing room in which he intimated that he had negative information about mr alston so we've i viewed that as part of the fact that the magistrate judge it concluded about a conspiracy had been pled and that included multiple members of the town government that that made it more plausible that mr speaker was also part of the town government just not in a not in the same position he's not a select board member he's a member of the advisory committee has a different position is a different role but it doesn't change the fact that he has this information and he's communicating it i not communicated directly to mr alston but when he communicates it to a supporter of mr alston that's how you do a smear campaign that's how you do it whisper campaign and that's what we've that's what i viewed was going on that the select were using proxies like mr spiegel were spreading information that would cause a firefighter allston to have pas about whether he wanted to continue to speak out and take on the town of brookline on his meeting that was publicized in the boston globe and the local paper it was only a week later that mr spiegel entered the picture and was in our view in my view spreading negative information about mr alston for the purpose of dissuading him from continuing to speak out and doing so in concert with other members of the town government can you point to anything then in your refiled claims that amount to more than what you know the magic just called cosmetic changes is there anything in your he found claims that it adds that adds meat to the sandwich your honor  i'm not going to challenge that it's obviously there are differences but i'm not i'm not going to challenge that if i can just respond to that point if if the if the complaint is  filed it or put a different way if it's not refiled that's if it's my view perhaps wrongly that the initial complaint had merit and the magistrate judge got it wrong because i have a different view of red then she does then i can't my client can't pursue that claim unless i refile it otherwise we're out we don't have a chance of ever seeing whether that claim holds muster and stands up to a review now maybe the case i'm feeling the signal that is not a claim that the st circuit has a lot of sympathy for but that doesn't mean that i'm not not have to accept the district court's invitation to allow you to really plead you could have said to the district court we're going to stand on that claim and then the district court would have had to rule up and down the district i objected to district court made a ruling it seems to me put me in a position where i had no choice but to refile or else i would be waiting  device at this time and attorney shots if you could please your device and introduce yourself on the record you have eight minutes thank you my name is naomi shots again representing defendant stanley spiegel and i'm here with my co counsel martin rosenthal will be taking the other two minutes of our time the district court's decision to award sanctions against attorney ames was well within its discretion and attorney ames has made no showing that discretion was abused in this case as this court does not argue that there is any erroneous finding of fact and for the reasons we discussed and briefed in the companion merits case that we just argued the district court did not make a mistake the law if you want to address to two small points my brother just made to correct something he said he claims that there was an allegation in the complaint that mr speel acted in concert with nancy daly with regard to the circulation of some published letters to the editor that is not an allegation that was made in the nd amended complaint which is the complaint that is at issue in this case relit relevant to mr speaker all i know you just had his discussion also with my brother about the question of whether he had to refile his claims in order to preserve them to be clear that is not something that mr circuits to hold that refiling is not necessary under these circumstances so this is that that is not what he was doing when he refiled he made as you noted a couple of cosmetic changes and continued to press his claim as a valid claim  e changing none of the substantive allegations attorney aims argument in this case that his claims were not frivolous because he argued for an extension of re versus ropes and gray really underscores exactly how frivolous they were because st he never made that argument to the trial court in the trial court he argued that existing law address his client's claims he is only now on appeal come up with this argument that an extension of re would be necessary to cover those that that is not what the trial court was looking at in deciding the merits of this case or the sanctions and nd of all as i think i alluded to in our merits argument if the if the  if the case would have to be extended to cover mr alston's claims against mr speedily and mr alston has pled that mr speaker was a public official who is entitled to qualified immunity then that argument is a concession that there was not clearly  therefore that mr olson cannot overcome mr spiegel's qualified immunity the purpose of rule eleven sanctions is to deter attorneys from filing frivolous or meritless claims and the district court would have been within its recommendation arguing to finding that it was not it did not give him grounds to make these claims against spiegel and you had the chance to argue that  not apply and no extension no bray would have applied and if it wasn't an extension all that good was support your qualified immunity defense right well he never argued any argument about extending ray and so you know that it's the point i'm getting at if he raises read a does he really have to specify either it applies directly or an extension of it and if he doesn't we hold he has waived the argument i'm not sure that you need that in order to  objective you want i i would agree with that as to the merits of the case whether i think my only point was that in his briefing he relies on the portion of rule eleven that states that a claim  frivolous if it is grounded in a you know a plausible reading of the law or argument for modification or extension of the law and there just that the court below had no opportunity to assess whether there was any possible modification or extension because that wasn't raised before it but i assume you below raised adad exception to rule levon does not apply here even if he didn't argue it does apply i think i would have to go back and look at exactly how we briefed it below but i believe we argued that that because he was  i don't know if we specifically addressed that exception because it wasn't raised here are i thank you as to my final point was just as to the discretion to award the sanctions the court could have done it when they dismissed the st amended complaint because those claims were entirely baseless and not predicate you know no reasonable attorney as required by rule eleven would have thought that the facts as alleged met any of the necessary legal elements of the claims being pursued again i'd be reluctant to rest on out to me your stronger argument is gee the judge gave him another chance and he decided to take the chance rather than foresee issue and taken a key goal and when he took the chance he didn't add anything if there are no further questions i will turn things over to attorney rosenthal ok thank you thank you thank you attorney shots you can use your device at this time attorney rosenthal please your device and introduce yourself reading that complaint is less than a three minute conversation by my calculations about three million minutes since two thousand and ten as he's also a post itself a qualified immunity whose goal was protecting like here if it if there was any abuse it's only been someone else so we say there ought to be a law thankfully there are civil laws and police and firm and by the way that racial animus would be a joke  counsel at this time that concludes the arguments in this case attorney ames attorney shots attorney rosenthal attorney and all skin attorney backer you should disconnect from the hearing at this time