york which involved just approved both approval of the settlement and certification of a class of investors and classification approval the settlement is only appropriate really it's only appropriate where the class represent connection with this particular company well you know on it with respect that's confusing the general assessment of the fairness of the settlement this is the adequacy of its intention and those are two independent inquiries that the school recognized payment data and i don't believe the district people and we've laid out a very specific example of investors who purchased in the i p o who sold their shares at a loss therefore have damages on the securities and statutory damages and they received those claims are released and they get zero shares in the i p o so we know a substantial number we don't know how many of those still helped with that was they still held and i didn't settle with this part of the twenty five class but on the as literary works makes very clear that excellent result for the class especially considering the collapse though he risks only sixty million dollars a day you know covered for me at the time of final approval the mediators including mr friedman who was added to the mediation specifically to address insurance coverage issues agreed that these are the only funds available for resolution of the case and that the six five one million dollars settlement was the most that could have been obtained a stated a mr meyer separation in this course in re drexel burnham lambert group decision another case where there is a limited thought on the bell of all the satisfy all claims the court noted that programming the negotiation process will increase the defendant's litigation costs with a consequent decrease in the size of the bond similarly here if litigation continued or the settlement was not approved there was a real chance of zero coverage for the class in approving the settlement judge ramos considered this issue and others including that the media in a settlement was reached or an arm's length court ordered mediation is strong evidence of fairness it can be inferred from the positive reaction of the class to the settlement including the endorsement by some of the larger shareholders the reasonable release is proper under nd circuit law as the release conduct and i'm led claims arise from the same for similar conduct election the action as discussed by the court in an array of american express financial advisors and wal mart stores the visa usa what do you make of the assertion about the fact that folks who sold the shares during the class period aren't included in the so i'm sure st of all i don't think that that is accurate before disclosure may not be charged defendants never rule as per now it's an acre mint the works communication and was reiterated in mcmahon v warehouse entertainment there is no disclosure between october th before october th two thousand  the objectors argument ignores the negative causation provision of section eleven but so there is a you're can let me just make sure understand what you're saying response of judge leslie question here you're saying there wasn't some subclass of want this settlement are getting zero or you can see that there's some group of people i don't know how big but that and because they had only that they are going to get zero because when they bought the shares and because of the nature of their claims well there there were some shareholders that purchased in the i p o and and sold before the st corrected disclosure but but again that to show that the decline in market value is unrelated to the material misstatements or emissions to escape liability in whole or in part they are you saying that no shareholder who had a securit security act claim and yet nothing are you disputing that i am not disputing that i'm saying that that we're not disputing that at all in our experts plan of and fifteen through the end of the class period when the company went bankrupt to recover under the case they'd do they do yes they do sir and and have to dish can if it fell that out a little  of nine months during the vast majority of the time that the security traded above the i p o price as much as thirty five percent of the i p o price so so our position and our experts position which w absolutely your honor so the notice we thought was adequate it comported with all requirements it fairly apprise the class members of the terms of the proposed settlement and of their options in accordance with this court's wall more wal mart stores eas and in terms of the lack of an agreement on the average amount of damages your position is that it complied with it yes l r a's when there is no agreement it simply disclose that there's no agreement that is correct and that's the court's in re bank of america corporate corp type of claim not the category of security or differing x if we've covered the planet allocation quickly to touch on the delaware claims claimants for cover under the plan of allocation those residual claims are highly speculative and lately derivative anyway and the settlement was a little received by the class this quarter wal mart store stated that the favorable reaction of the overwhelming majority of class members to the settlement is perhaps the most significant factor in inquiry there is only one objection here there were twenty two dollars exclusions one of which had again the settlement was supported by some of patriots largest shareholders including the largest non german share her with her nine million