pennsylvania we've decided to take it on a on a bite size basis because we know when this court has said that we're dealing with a rock the fishing states that's far more difficult than for states and we've also carefully p claims that the court will note that many claims that have been brought in each of the cases and we're only focusing on the claims that we think are appropriate for cross certification before i get into the first state case i want to spend just a minute  on the bankruptcy issues before you go there i want to make sure i understand the your seat you're holding you really is my understanding quickly teacher of maintaining your legal position position that you have a just disciplined b one b class on a nationwide basis but he want to spend your time talking about that you want to focus only on the floor stay classy well i am but i am going to spend a couple minutes at the outset on the nationwide clash on or that's hard with what's going expressly found that all class members have an interest in obtaining our ruling on the outlook ability of right and with mr court recognize the importance of the right issue to potentially thousands of unnamed class members but the and others were it's not right because when you get to specific people the friends will test is a fact specific one so you can answer it specifically you have to answer that on an individualized basis without asking for where for example you decide the issue is pattern and practice and that's it or you decide to effect the way the butler case so we think that it doesn't really adjudicates the rights of the parties and the problem they actually have some kind of a claim here you've acknowledged you can't get that claim for individuals in this class because you don't know whether friend phil scott apply or how it's going to apply it should say to give them relief you even acknowledge should ignore the court's right decision and then that person is out without any possibility of educating their individual facts at all we don't understand why owens corning as opposed to this they say they want the judgment to apply were people said we were strip search we were subject to this and now we're title to some relief and now you have to examine the law to tell whether that was actually constitutional violation here you're saying maybe somebody in texas someday might file a complaint if they complaint then maybe a texas court maybe will say grossman's is let them go under a i understand that argument you're out of it's the same argument you could make about twenty three c for that deciding an issue is not the same as deciding a claim and we're long past that there are your asking for a legal declaration which seems to me to be somewhat different than an issue a typical issue of class is an oh i mean there there were twenty three applies to questions of law or fact and there are certainly cases where i thought of a class action is deciding the question of law so we don't understand the problem here we were looking for a way it's a bit warm scorning wouldn't turn around and basically abrogate this court's decision and right and that's the problem we face and i would direct the court to gilbert since we weren't rich and for similar issues the argument there was you don't need a class action because the issue is already decided and the court said that court should be very cautious in denying class certification on the theory that you don't need in it and that explains exactly the problem that we face here the problem is is that we can't control what owns corning is going to do in another case so what you want us to say all class members that's what we want some but they actually have a judgment there's a big difference between a judgement that southwick only to the two plaintiffs which is what we have now but how can we get how can we render that  which case it's advisory or you want something binding which is something the district court noted a friend's room while she would have to take that on either even if you're asking for something too big could mean anything or you're asking for something very specific and then you impact rather than just the circuit this is he said but how do you how do you distinguish cough cough and resin a class action that doesn't present any of these issues at all we think that was a very narrow about the implication of collateral of stop it so we can argue all we want in texas and iowa but we can't control those court with those courts know unless we have a judgment a class right judgment because it's absolutely clear and i would  stop all that i saw on their brief and i haven't heard him respond to that he would mr crime which is what is the answer is a texas judge or a small claims court of whoever it is the don't have to respond us a stop it can be more judgement but in bodies the class cannot be ignored we wanted to work with owens corning to figure out a way to make the decision apply and we've just been adamantly opposed and that's the reason why we think and argue elsewhere in the country in situations where i'm not there and where mr phillips is not there and of course i trust him and his word that's what we're worried about this now claims court situation whatever it is we want a judgment dettori classes with no opt out right so i think it's very similar in any case this is an incredibly we case for ascertained ability the court in the city select auto case just held very recently that  the court said that the ascertained ability problem is that you can't ascertain anyone so in in small claims cases where you have a consumer purchase and know we're see these are big purchases so lots of people are going to have to record some of our it looked like the only thing this through til it did was examined three hundred shingles so submitted connection with warranty claims they don't understand that correctly  hundred shingles that were from warranty claims and actually test new bellows there was a bigger group of seven hundred that he looked at he looked it were his assistants and looked at the plaintiff's homes combined with with point i'm asking about but that's the part was doesn't try to ask about and that was stricken and you protest that right and mike my question to you this how is it an abuse of discretion for a district court judge to say in putting aside the stipulation first of all that's ever was all morning is the one that didn't save whether the shingles over time so that we could actually it's done for testing and this is very similar in that sense to tyson food becomes overwhelming and indeed if you look at the breeze from my colleagues on the other side and they don't deal with causation and deal with damages they don't deal with injury those are all issues that have to be individually determined indeed ultimately even the misrepresentation would not degrade or otherwise within that twenty year period and what the court said even as to that but even among the name plaintiffs two of them didn't infer from the from the period of the warranty but fact that in fact that it was a misrepresentation of any sort right to the root and finding whether or not there defective so you may or may not be a misrepresentation at all under those circumstances and then you're going to have to determine what was the causation and then you're going to have to determine whether or not there's been any injury all of those issues inappropriate to reach that conclusion it's a state issue but at the end of the day as many plaintiffs are going to say no i never i never assumed that this thing was going to be perfect for twenty five years and because again i want the i assumed i was going to be compensated if in fact it didn't satisfy last for twenty five years and that's what two of the plaintiffs in this case testified to so that under these circumstances it's not even that's not frankly a class where you wouldn't you wouldn't try that on a class white basis under these circumstances you range and consideration of the merits and you responded i don't think that's a fair characterization of the judge's opinion whatsoever which he consistently said that she was looking at whether or not this is a case in which you could decide in one fell swoop on a class basis did was say as to some of the point lives they didn't bait that's not how they interpret it they didn't rely on and this is some of them they did that that's that's saying you can't decide on our class wide basis nothing but the some of the plaintiffs some individual parties might have a legitimate cause of action it may be that in texas if you want something for twenty five years that could be interpreted as a representation that it will remain good for twenty five years that's fine if that's the rule in texas but that's a very limited issue in the litigation which they're asking for one million class members none of whom are frankly ascertainable on claims that are based on two hundred seventy nine shingles i mean none of that provide any fundamental basis for certification under these circumstances here on ars  applies across the board to the class that's exactly the argument and once you have that you have the basis for class certification and we'll buy some fruit says this hold on meet head on mr phillips argument about and yes i but that's what i was going but tyson foods and butler say that just because you have some individual issues if you have an overarching common issue you can certify we quoted the exact language out of tyson food designs in the shingles and multiple different assertions about how their problems have developed with them and so those are so that butler pool just in a clickable because determine whether we thought her the kind of evidence that can be tried on a class wide basis as judge would wrote for the seventh circuit disenchanted class actions are just as appropriate in cases that are stated to lose as in cases that are where basis because of all the different kinds of shingles and different compositions and and frankly look at it mr hutto was stuff i don't see how you've got even a basis on which to say defect with respect may i ask a question or i don't understand your argument to be though that the percentage of asphalt in each of the many varieties of shingles was consistent  that the extent to which a shingle fails or doesn't fail year twelve or year eighteen or if you're forty two he's going to be very very individualized depending upon the astral ration will show doesn't depend on the individual a circumstance if you're right every member of the class has has suffered a didn't mean you shouldn't value because they didn't get what they were paying for and i submit my anecdotal answer