we don't think that this case belongs in federal court it shouldn't have been removed it should have then remanded and even if that wasn't the case this is a very fact intensive ca nothing in the complaint indicates that this case is worth anything more than ten thousand dollars to get into a state district court you say well it's ten thousand or more and and that's what we've yeah the only thing that  indicated that it might be worth a little more than that is during an argument which was attended by my starship the judge says well how much is at issue here and he says well ten to twenty thousand and we put that in our memorandum there was nothing indicating that that was without troubling and without attorney fees and without cards for anything of that nature and there was no showing by anybody that indeed  that was either single damages treble damages or whatever then constituting a judicial admission and it was stated in the context while there was this previous case more egre and he did say in the context of a previous case which permitted treble damages which was more greed just which had been resolved for substantially less than seventy five thousand dollars so they court in the first place in our briefing we said quite frankly you have to state the jurisdictional amount of the moving papers if you do it later on it's too late we didn't want to concede that they could which was repealed about a year after we filed the said if you sell gas our product at last and one area than you do in another injured competition you violated idaho law and tr damages an attorney fees would be allowed for the fact the third claim is that they violated the unfair sales act and were looking for an injunction to make them fall along so two cla which would not permit attorney fees which would not result in trouble damages and one claimed that would permit attorney fees and would permit traveling in the amount of controversy look to traveling i mean there's no indication in the record whether that included or exploited that and i guess if the defendant has the burden of proof they have to show that yeah the ten or twenty thousand was xclusive of traveling theory i charge these people fifty thousand blacks for the first case i mean they're poor little little mom and pop ors and i coulda charged him ten times that are going to whatever because we went through seven days in the jury trial but hey you know let's give him a include the sale or the gasoline fact the other side says no you don't that's not reasonable our experts sad if you don't include the federal and state tax it's a violation of gap they did not include the gasoline tax and criticize the cases we cited the say you do but didn't present any cases supporting his proposition and maverick can't find an either all a cases there are say you cost on replacement they have the burden of showing that they have the ability to use a replacement car in order to do that they show they have to show what the trade area is they have to show that something because the trade area issue is only something that applies to a defendant showing he has to show that the replacement cost is from a trade area  he has to show a thesis that says he's meeting competition he has to show that the competition is being made in a particular trade area the district court put all of those  customers that's deceptive to consumers essentially as a matter of line all of these issues were hotly contested and the court nevertheless place you can buy gas and supply point it's not a matter of whether there's four or five options there's really idaho that's the only place the pipeline goes mr curves testimony or affidavit which is filed by stop says that it doesn't matter how they report on their tax returns it's whether or not they met the statutory definition of replacement cost and we did we should then are as they said they got our books we should have our actual price of purchasing it mr  there's several several reasons first of all the burden does shift to show that when the complaint has a general allegation greater than ten thousand doesn't say ten thousand or less  thousand you can travel and get to twenty four thousand but what they represent of the court was that they were damaged ten to twenty they represent to the court that the damages were less than the statutory  stage you don't have any evidence yet we do we have a signed affidavit by our client who in the case of us analyze what they were asking in the complaint for us to have to price it and that pushing the legal pricing would be in excess of twenty five thousand dollars we have an ten thousand dollars he didn't say what he was you know he cost if you had to write it like the back against the other side might be a little higher and actually the district court made that observation in this from a nation of the amount in that i have indicated that the damages may be less than twenty thousand dollars i think they may be trying to be conservative to avoid going to federal court i believe judge lay in his creighton law review article back and i think it was to be about twenty miles and virtually about another twenty five about forty five miles from berkeley  all you're getting a discount of are we going discounts we get early pay discounts we have several discounts basically for the amount of gas we get we get a discount off the prices that some of the other party more than one stores yet for exactly i mean we're wyoming corporation and we work through the whole world so when we get the bill for the gas that all taxes not part of the bill make another penny profit because that kind of does not go the government stays in our in our pocket but in this situation what it would do to make his charge in statutory make it hard for more than the cost of doing business because of the tackles that doesn't change our cost of cost of the merchandise that's with what i'm focusing on in the statute the tax is something the federal government and the state government have tacked on to the cost of the merchant i think for their purposes it's not a cost to the merchandisers not a cost to the with all of our all of our pricing including the catch the only question is whether we have to mark the catch up by a penny to avoid doing predatory pricing we have to mark the taxable penny to establish what our cost of doing business is and what i'm saying is tax is not a cost of doing business it is totally unrelated it doesn't increase or decrease our cost of doing business our cost of doing business or utilities or our salaries our leases are all our c that this is this statutory markup of existence supposed to cover do not vary at all based upon cash those taxes are posted on and sold through completely so i think by the fact that the statute the fine is the cost per unit of the merchandise scholz that it's not dealing with taxes it's dealing with what the main a factor with gas he's charging us for the gas and the now they try to get around that by saying we don't have to prove what the statute passed all we have to do is go to one of forty eight for all to which says that if you sel made the kind of case that you have to to make a case on the unfair sales that we've shown all of those elements are c p a was not retained to go answer the questions that mr their business and we've lost money in the c p a did show that their revenues go down when there are these periods of underpricing so we didn't make that showing with regard to the question of little less for the gas but they pay a lot more for the coke and the sandwich and all of those other things that people buy when they get drawn in and buy these artificially low prices and judge when ma can make a lot of money on that stuff but that has nothing to do with your your problem your problem is you can't meet their gasoline price and get your customers and we know that that price includes the gasoline tax and they say well that's the prevailing price in the area and our guy brant curves who's also a wholesaler says it's not a prevailing price  create an inference in favor of that stock that would preclude summary judgment judge said no well we'll take mavericks word on this one thank you thank you very much mr jones