thinking the judgment here doesn't dispose of all the claims in the cases it's only on the administrative mandamus so i wonder if there's a final judgment or fifty four b certification so that the judge's indicate about something here and i'm sure you'll be able to help me out and it looks to me as though the colorable claim for discrimination was other employees who were not black and not ethiopian also stole money from the university and they didn't get fired as so the university was discriminating by race and nationality and firing mo again but it looks to me as though the claim of before us is not that one but rather the claim that the administrative proceeding did not comply with the administrative not have been dismissed but he was on a parallel proceeding however the adverse decision affected basically what his the reason first germination they found that he misused university resources and they found th determined that there is reasonable cause to believe that charging party was discriminated against in the start because of race or national origin that basically caucasian in ethiopia exhausting to the extent the court of what exactly the issue is you can't do it concurrently before you father civil claims in california you need to have exhausted your administrative and then your judicial remedies if you f can't file a claim until you have a final judgment in your administrative mandamus with university of california now that's not exactly what we're saying however if you elect to go through the administrative procedures of the university of california provides there's case  claims including fee hoc until you have overturned an adverse determination of the subject matter that you seek to have adjudicated in court so what happened is he went through the administrative process of the university of california which determined that his determined i'm his trauma nation was not because of unlawful reasons it was because he had endorsed a check made out to a third party deposit into his own account and kept that money for a year until the regents found out that he had done that those are the  by coming up with that determination course of how that he can proceed on a few hot climb alleging that he was terminated because of race national origin that's why he would have to overturn the adverse administrative proceeding i wonder i wonder if that's right that he gets to overturn the adverse administrative proceeding what i'm thinking is that the administrator proceeding is to determine whether it is just whether he did in fact steal money from the university and it's just fired him for and the answer to both questions i what he's saying is selective enforcement they don't fire nonny p o p o not ethiopians who feel as so it's perfectly logical to lose the the administrative was discriminatory to fire him because they don't fire not ethiopian to do the same thing a discriminatory application of discipline i discriminatory application of perfectly fair discipline i understand that was addressed in the hearing though and  about him being ethiopian and along those lines but he went into a discussion of the discipline that was meted out to look at it that it was fair and this and there was no evidence that it was being done differently with that i put the evidence in my papers and i won't go through it with you here and he did make comments about it there was nothing in the reply so i would like to talk a little bit about is the fact the allegation in the regions violated their internal