the main question in this case is whether the court can reasonably infer the bit that the defendants were deliberately and are ready to recognize that mr furey required follow up care for a serious medical need to lay deny that care for non medical reasons of any any sort of care so he based on the sick call policy without any evaluation of his individual medical needs and it was after that that he pushed back through the door and was op punished as a result allegedly failed to notify provider for the orders and in in recording that she recognized that the motion she had provided mr fury was insufficient to properly treated the injury and that further orders were in fact required and having recognised that her subsequent failure to notify the provider constitutes an expect an unexpected bill an unexplained delay a follow up care despite recognizing a serious need that is sufficient at pleading been contested here and rightly so so if i turn briefly to the issue of denial we have to amend our police our position is that mr fury's allegations are more than sufficient to pass straight through discovery and justify reversal the district court on that basis but even if the court disagrees mr pure shit at least receive an opportunity to amend his complaint to adam to add allegations and clarify existing ones the district court concluded that amendment would be futile because it misconstrued mr fury the allegations as challenging only the adequacy of treatment he received but mr perry's allegations clearly point to the add detail about his interactions with the defendants when they were made at various points in the plane and about the appearance of this toe and about their conduct that would strengthen the care but he simply disagreed with the care in the time when this of the care that he was provided instance this is nothing more than a difference of opinion as to the care that was provided in the  properly dismiss this case and probably dismiss this case with prejudice and i too will follow through kind of the timeline of the various terraces that's acceptable to the court nurse of her specter she had one interaction with the point of he came to her said i hurt my toe she looked at it you can see that she examined it she gave him an ice pack which was treatment she did allegedly state that will get your motor in it the next you're on an idea that is absolutely correct i concede that point i didn't need anything other than it's been alleged that i'm not disputing that it was not alleged and were bound by that allegation thank you ron  so she says will get medication at the next med pass and as i was starting to say there they are not doing sick call or doing rounds she was there for a purpose of doing med bass so again we have to look at the total context of what's going on here what she knew at that time which was hey i'm here for a separate function this gentleman says that he's got a problem i see that he has a problem i dressed what i could right now somebody else will follow up afterwards i submit to you that that's appropriate now the fact that the nurse mccully did not give him pain medication later shouldn't be attributable to nurse heart attack or she was a nurse she's there doing medication packs he refuses to do this a call process and i think another important thing to keep in mind is i have conceded at this point that he suffered a serious injury contends that didn't happen i submit to the court if you look at what he had alleged in his complaint and that's a record site j a twenty one he says that the she did that's referring to a nurse  did my sick call twenty eight hours after i broke my toe she said she would notify the provider for the orders but never did notify the physician's assistant very next statement she told me that p s a did not wan race i submit to the court that that's a clear indication that she did call the p s a and that the p a just didn't order anything else and that she communicated that to the player so i  know we says it one way but right beneath it you can't i submit to the court you can't have it both ways you can't not make a phone call but yet also to be informed that the physician's assistant didn't order something additional and i s to the court the fact that it took three additional days after the motor in those had run its course for him to submit a sick call slip is consistent with him being told the p a didn't want to actually because he wasn't expecting anything further when the when well first of all this isn't as if you're going to walk into the medical department with three dollars and that isn't how this works it's going to be deducted by the county from his account later so there's no denial of refusing to provide care just as he wasn't prevented from filing this lawsuit without filing to be advance or at the time of filing it can be deducted later looking at subjectively he refuses to go through that process how bad can it big but yet he did foll grievance he complained and he was seen by that a based upon the pleadings he was seen by the physician's assistant a couple of days later there she died gnosis the broken toe and order subsequent care all of this is what than a two week period and i submit that within that two week period he's evaluated by there six that multiple times he was he was given ice which eventually refused he was given a course of pain medication to deal with this condition when he didn't get any better he sought additional care and go to the case be dismissed and why was appropriate for it to be dismissed with prejudice without leave to amend in this case is that the operative facts are going to change i submit to the court and why this court should affirm the district court is that he was a value adopting a report recommendation that he does own independent review of the record he also sa said was he did his own renew and he also says that what was a raise of the objections doesn't undermine the recommendation and i submit to the court that's consistent because even if you take those facts out there's not there's not the liberty endeavor so even if you remove the misstated facts that still leaves us with that inmate who was evaluated by a person that on multiple occasions received a course of of pain medication and to the court that it's an unfortunate result that's not compensable so if there are no further questions i'm out of time i respectfully request that the court a forum the dismissal of this case with prejudice thank you very much confronted about this she just gave him an answer to sort of put him off and this is that that pretextual that further evidence of a pretext for the allegation of pretext further supports the inference of her suit was an act in court my client with deliberate indifference through on recognizing that he needed further care thank you thank you very much for your art did you thank you very much joe for doing this probiotics greatly appreciated we will take this letter it doesn't get back to shortly thanks again