morning we have two cases the smorgon first is number fifteen dash thirty forty robinson versus danberg at all is  police and mr hanlon whenever you're ready y decision to mr robinson's pre sentence claims you've got nine claims here why don't you start with the ones that you think are the most favorable this is a claim that police did not include in the original motion for summary judgment or the opening brief for the district court only in reply that a police argue that that was incident report demonstrated that robinson yanked his hand away from well which likely accounts for any injuries noted in the medical reports light of site strength should we make something however of the very minimal injuries that were experienced here and aren't we under the jurors permitted to consideration i'm sorry what was the last point are we under the case law permitted to give consideration to the minimal injuries experience you are to answer that point first yes you're allowed to give consideration to yesterday and that was one month later one month later it was still swelling on his wrist and here's why it's important with regard to the foot your honor in that x ray he's complaining of injuries ok so he's seen by a doctor they shower in the shower that had feces in it and i had to be walked around that's what caused this this that mr beck will be upset are you arguing for reversal or is are really all that would be appropriate for us at this rebalance one of the factors but i think the record as presented allows us to a court to say the injuries were not minimal number one and there are reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the trial record that he wasn't resist and getting back to judge ambrose point as the injuries the x ray one month later did not show any are three conditions in his left foot the second x ray about a month after that did show arthritic conditions present so he's been complaining he hit the back of his foot while close the back of robinson's foot was hit while the door was being closed that apparently didn't cause any immediate injuries that he says he had ron what evidence did he put that contradicted the fact that he was being uncooperative a poet he submitted that he did not want to go to the shower that an inmate allegedly deficit robinson testified that while he was handcuffed and walked out of a cell behind his back for a routine cell shakedown which is that's normal course they're handcuffed downey struck him in the mouth and bloodied his lip and now he continued by testifying that major scarborough quote came running down screaming and hollering had quote robinson quote taken down to see the nurse but even even by robinson's account this was not a punch with i mean didn't robinson himself when this one individual signed an affidavit saying he was maced to the food flag not under the door ok that doesn't magically erase the fact that he was nased it just a question of credibility or more importantly recollection of the facts what do we do with the fact that he doesn't even report any injuries the first three grievances that he files here it's not until the or if there's anything about injury from the scene where he immediately grieved that the mason and asked for medical ventilation so he's been maced all of them elation has been put turned off and he's stuck in this small that's a scary cell with mace for overnight and he's not he doesn't receive medical attention that's threatening to kill him he repeatedly raises concerns with the internal affairs department specifically mr bellamy but to no avail these allegations of being called a snitch are corroborate years retired he says being labeled a snitch in prison presents a very serious risk of very serious injury from other inmates i'm not going to get another inmate to say oh he's a stitch i want to kill him it's what i can only present you what mr robinson's her what the what the other fines have heard as to what risks he faces and more and also to the point he was in the uk some security for most of this time he's only allowed out of a cell one hour  that that characterization was made all robinson by prison personnel a guard or whomever to inmates that's essentially what he has to show yes you for the specifics of what he said how does he point to eight said i'm a snitch to be well i said i don't think it's you know  conversation i think it's more they're yelling it on it here they're saying you know robbins is a snitch you know it's not it's free conversations between correctional officers or one on one discussions with other inmates it's vocal downing yes your honor the i mean at the very least doesn't that call for e mail because the court didn't deal with the excessive force i don't believe so your honor and here's why  my perspective your hunger the court could remain for further elaboration i think that's not i think that the third circuit could rule on the record that the force used was de minimus and that would be an efficient use of judicial resources rather than have a second opinion be written but i i think you know backing up just a little bit and this is what we try to point to souter opening brief we were dealing drugs he was dealing initially with a case that had forty seven defendant it only two hundred nine paragraphs in unison across a complaint almost every single paragraph alleged a separate cause of action some of them related to each other to find large it was almost two hundred claims in a case a veritable diary of dalian constitutional violations according miss robinson she screamed out thirty seven to forty seven defendants and we were left with ted there are still a large number of claims that throughout the case after mr friess was appointed claims were dropped off should be enough to get mr robinson by well you know i think what has to happen is there has to be in this record a little bit more detail on exactly what happened and i don't mean to slam march how much is a little  off because a previous and there had been a previous documented incident of a of cap standing of an unruly inmate mr langford and that's why the ventilation was turned off so as not to spread the fumes mr magruder testified to this force here was objecting who in the middle of at the outset of this discussion on this point you said that if you spray mace into a closed cell with the ventilation turned off you've got a problem well already inside not a threat that that is a problem and so it can't be necessarily the minimal scan it i said under for certain circumstances i could see that  shows that this was and above the minimum standard there are cases where evidence do you need you got you got the robinson you've got evidence you've got jackson well for example your honor well if i may you have somebody's judgment what we're seeming to say or even may perhaps even agree on is a material issue of fact the alley said later on she didn't mason it's a report doesn't say anything you have the inmate and two others saying that he was maced why is that not a material issue i think she went through all the evidence and i think if you find that the force was not a minimalist and we do have a disputed frequently decide whether or not force rises to the level that's sufficient to go to or even under speed it backs yeah because it that because that particular calculus is really a question  yeah i mean if you look at hudson versus new no one you had egregious alleged uses of force punching kicking and with the court the lower courts are set or at least one of the lower court said well that the n b a was lucky enough to not sustain any serious j one forty one and i think the court is aware of this mr robinson has asked for a single name of any inmate who has ever turned against me could give one example he says two hundred inmates were turned against him yet he was opposing twenty tof and this claim i think stemmed from well he said since two thousand and eight this has been happening since he was in cars or what you have here is you have robinson stating that henry harrison young called him a stitch in earshot of arrest that's clear in reality and in the cases but there it's telling that any evidence that was provided on this issue one the defendants are constantly changing you look at his testimony look at the complaint they're all over the place it's just like mr hastings has the same exact kind of allegations in a court credit summary judgment there i think where you have some specific factual allegation against name defendants and then there's you know plainly failed to apply many of the nightly factors in and i you don't address a number of them even in your brief why shouldn't at a minimum  foot you don't have any injuries from that you don't have any medical testimony and no medical expert in this case tying asked you are arthritic changes three months later to that it's all how old is the play you know  i think he's middle in his forty's me everybody that age has a little i've managed to avoid it so i did but the hand in particular i mean even  not necessarily want to because i believe that the district court can look at what an objective real law officer would have done in that circumstance including on this is expressing from can kingsley what that officer knew at the time and you he had although those statements don't appear to relate directly to the allegation of this snatch both of the affidavit described either conduct threats directly by the officers of what the officers mr robinson's testimony were all put in before i even received the logbooks the logbooks dovetail completely with our version of the facts from the phone call that mr robinson received and was cut short to great land langford getting maced independently of this the ventilation being shut off and then you know we have after that grievances the next day not only on not only on the ten but the very next