difference for judgment on the pleadings two months before that hearing plaintiff's counsel asked at a scheduling conference regarding that hearing that the plaintiffs be allowed to amend the complaint we believe that the absolutely the case law had there certainly is case law straight strong on that point there are exceptions in those cases that talk about situations where the parties have had an opportunity on a record to request the right to appeal defense counsel has had an opportunity to argue and the court can you give me a case  the district court had denied the right to him and and here the district court said that right should have been allowed there was no formal written request for the believed to be given and yet the court did permit that in fact several cases addressing specifically these complaints that had been filed by my firm against hospitals the in the settlement we learned a defendant wasn't somebody or something and we amended as a stipulation we agreed to do it it wasn't a request to amend the complaint there were times where we had a judgment on the pleadings the court granted that motion and granted us move to and as of right which the liberal rules permit we did then final and amended pleading and the court then that was again moved against it if there was an appeal there we took that up but but in this case it is a very clear and back to judge thompson's question was the court was very clear and you can follow that but we're not but i'm going to say exactly what i said today we are not moving forward multiple times in the record he says that and then there is a documentary reason that we had to yes but you are correct in the step back and explain why that that situation occurred there had been cases like this around the country we did in different states in different jurisdictions in this district there had been a decision in the form of a proceeding this time summer argument their weight went in our favor only need issue with the court or that the defendants quite are going to be moving to dismiss we had one favorable decision directly on point we consequences so in essence saying that the complaint put in a good relationship we have that decision in our favor then there was a february decision by judge so babbitt came out and suggested the reverse of that that the employer relationship needed to be but differently truly believed that our complaint was was adequate on the pleadings that we wanted to move forward the district were and the court of appeals this this court had ruled that or that that this was a time period of great change in how these cases and i said i didn't think the court would entertain it the pleadings have been filed but now we realize we're in trouble there's some cases going against us against the weight of the evidence and i gave multiple reasons then as to why we should be permitted to turn in the complaint the court heard do the hearing isn't for another two months you don't do it you don't do it right after that hearing in that period of time before they plaintiff's counsel april first detailing all the deficiencies in their complaint and i think it's useful for the poor to understand exactly the burden that this particular clip complaint has placed on federal courts across the situation how are you more bridge every two years trying to work out negotiations and why if you were on the verge it's that lying would it not irresponsible for opposing counsel this money doing something that may not have been necessary if the case was going to settle you know one of the point that the court was taking the motions to dismiss the settlement was not proceeding so we  conference the poor first took the issue of whether it was going to design them think if they made a reasonable but irani is judgment that based on at least some court having found that their complaint acted with much they be penalized for that and when there wasn't a reasonable assumption at that point in time is there any case law that says that they have to be just because opposing counsel says the complaint is adequate that they should not other changes said is that perhaps have some similarities to the present case these are other cases dealing with the exact same complaint and in fact your honor in those other courts where the courts were looking at whether the complaint was appeals heard these issues that these had not been addressed around the country this would have been the first court of appeals to address that and we needed to get that issue up and believed that we had played it out of quickly and one of them we were wrong on the other one we had a little bit of