we should we don't have much of a record improperly we do if you look at the i guess the idea is if and when the government submits the documents that are attached to its motion to dismiss with a declaration that is not signed i'm being facetious i think what i'm saying is that there were there were matters submitted to the district court that this court i think can fairly assume will be the same and the there are issues out there in this context that the district from i expressed an interest in doing this i got a phone call from the pro bono clerk she sent me the record and then once i was in waist deep it was too far to wade back out thanks for taking my case counsel the district court i don't believe considered matters outside the record as the court is aware the government's position is that the court denied all forty one emotion and properly took into account whatever doctrine is used incorporation by reference judicial notice which the existence of which were called into question by the motion itself in a way if the district court were not to consider those documents it's much like a person who sues for personal injury calls their medical court the government was the government which brought knowing that the climate at that time was prostate particularly brought to the attention of the court for the first time even before briefing on the merits of the motion the issue of whether the court should treat that pleading as a motion a criminal procedural motion or if you're treated as a complaint and the court never reached the alternative to the motion the second alternative which was to treat it as a complaint the court last i'm not now interested in what the facts might turn out to be but on the questions whether or not this motion has to be treated as if it were a complaint yes i do not believe your honor in other if it's mandatory then i submit the rule that would come from your opinion would be one that directs district courts to always apply or invoke equitable jurisdiction even if there is or was an adequate legal remedy to meet and that is the real that is the real issue adequacy the legal remedy depends upon whether or on the merits of the notice and the underlying forfeiture a person has missed that opportunity if the notice was constitutionally attempted and she had but now you i'm sure you're aware of the timing of this y there is that reply that comes the fire on the twenty sixth of july yes and i'm not sure whether that's been drawn to judge holland's attention but in a reply for example we've got a lot of things that say  after the p s artist filed here as our contains information that says she's in san diego giving the name of the town so the government i think maybe two different pieces of the government but the government knew she wasn't alaska so that constitutional sufficient  government has no way of tracking down but she's not in alaska p s r gives just the name of the town where she lives in council california so just mailing to general delivery in pinion hills california would be all the property that's the perfect right to contest the adequacy of notice to her but if the notice doesn't reach or she can't raise if the notice me then she has a problem because she has an adequate legal remedy if the notice wasn't adequate then she goes forward you are that's certainly correct logically that is correct that you are asked the question earlier about whether she may or may not have added had actual notice and when when she had actual notice i would like to direct the court's attention to something the record that i don't think the district court articulated but it is evidence in the record that would support the denial of the motion and it is this the court may recall the petition and again of course if the government does not prevail on the extraneous records having been considered that was improper then this doesn't matter but if that was not improper in the court's view the district also had before it a video camera back if the court looks at that document carefully here is what the court will see number one there is a number on that is a it's called a color number but it's a number that is only available when you get one of the mailed notices we've actually and most important the sale of a number of pieces of property to suppose the generated the three thousand dollars or some of it that was taken from her now how could those documents be submitted by mr ritchie one day after the deadline would have expired for the actual notice without her having then some communication about this petition or the actual notice between mr rich in this corner and i argued this in my opposition to the motion and i believe that's what the judge did although he didn't articulate it that's  was told something maybe even hold up in the course of the proceedings but you better make sure you know there are going to be a question on the money so you better make sure that you document it and so forth or i mean who knows that's the problem the legal argument that the notice which was afforded was was constitutionally permissible the joseph heller aspect of this case i think is also shown by the fact there's a built in and governance in terms of the discussion of the record but notice is here possibly in question and all we need an evidentiary hearing tantamount to summary judgment instead of merely saying something like arguably and the paper submitted to judge ho absolutely it's a complaint everybody knows it's complain to the government it was a complaint you got to treat it like a complaint but if i'm going to be a glory hound you know what rule against me on that and let's look at the evidence the idea the notice here was constitutionally was in federal custody but possible it's outrageous i mean