section twenty u s c fifteen fifteen hundred there are two primary questions on appeal did the court set a claim zero in that a claim is pending in another court for purposes of section fifteen hundred it would seem that it only goes to the take i mean you are doing great the motion to dismiss because the claims were just next which goes to the taking claims than those with the one that you were ok on them tono in bringing forward to the  claims during that window every right right ok and then use the operative to the absence of operative back to then say because it was ok's to bring the tape in you can still do it because there's no similarity jurisdiction do not apply fifteen second fifteen pounds that and especially since there is no jurisdiction means the government even recognized this is seeking to dismiss the tak police who was not right so we didn't have article three jurisdiction into the district court lectures diction a little tougher because we wanted more than ten thousand dollars so there was nothing pled it was exercising abundance of caution clearly it was even stated in the counter claim that the court didn't have jurisdiction but we were trying to protect our rights to ultimately see taking to the case  i haul i'm only speaking for myself here but if you if you lose on everything and you know we've got the takings counterclaim pending and legally operative because it doesn't matter that there was no jurisdiction  agree that that amended or that the putative amended claim was pending for purposes of section fifteen hours in the claims court dismissed claims court action on appeal this  justified and also detracts from their arguments that claim that there is no jurisdiction for is p government argues that the claim was impending it was never added to the case but that case said jurisdiction and that was more of a case then a case that has no jurisdiction because a case has no jurisdiction all the court can do is dismiss it's not limitation was pending while the collateral view was ongoing the supreme court said pending include the time to file a new application even though there was no time to file the application under comedy finality in federalism and those precise question in love ways and this is appears in the opinion after section two it says the precise issue in this case is the meaning of the term claims and the court goes on to examine the question of whether the district claims because it was important at that time to determine whether the request for monetary relief in the district court was the same or did say that if there is no jurisdiction over it that it's a legal knowledge correct right but that was all in the context of determining whether there was jurisdiction to provide mind free relief in the district court and that's all part of the parade that to home no tim says is is well actually obliterated in terms of what's a reasonable interpretation of lovel judgment and that doesn't become final and the case is closed on the district court docket so if the statute says pending in any court there is a period that is essentially limbo where there is nothing on the district court docket uncertainty on the part of government whether it's going to have to continue to bear the burden of defending duplicate lawsuits so that that's part of the purpose of section fifteen tons of the statute actually that pending in any court i mean a specific lee said that has to be pending penalty act i looked at the plain language of pending and could be concluded that in that interim the plain language of pending meant that the case was in the death penalty context that they were talking about having to exhaust state remedy and they're saying that during that period of time you still have the right to keep moving through that's an entirely different context than a statute that specifically talks about ending in a court well i mean this statute is also a condition of the government's waiver of sovereign immunity and i'm not sure th what that's correct but what grant have to show because of the can the construction that wavers a sovereign immunity or constrain the government's favor is that there's only one correct reading of the statute and that's the one you advocate and then you know the fact that we're trying to address thi were up here trying to apply a jurisdictional statute to congress and acted to the best of our ability in a way that's clear and that people can play predict the results of and the fact that some religion might be put to the choice of different remedies and that might put him or her in understand but if the court's going to construe fifteen hundred to allow for these gaps in time where six can be filed it's going to result in the same problems that we see in a predictability with the order of filing rule where one day there's jurisdiction and  impact the application of fifteen hundred and said well yes there are a lot of proud language but that was the only holding in some you know i agree with that and i would just say that you know this is an issue the court does not need to reach my only point addressing judge friend question and mentioning that in order to finally rule is to say that to adopt the role as the brand is advocating it raises the same concerns in a new context that suddenly one day there's no jurisdiction in the next day there is but i under your theory again now remember they didn't you keep talking about them having a choice of ramming this with the government who went in and saw the declaration of abandonment and sought the quiet title correct that's correct all right tell them you forced them into avoid manipulation of the process and what you're saying is that we should interpret fifteen hundred in a way to allow the government to manipulate well no i'm not saying that and i'm not there's no suggestion here that the government has manipulated the process in this case or any other case but you need argue they should've waive their the meaning of fifteen hundred and you know there's nothing of the jury instruction the only way they could have could have preserved any right to seek compensation from the government for that for the taking of their property is to waive their ability to appeal the determination that the government had the right to take their property right well i mean i don't know that that's entirely correct i mean they you're right that an appeal would be a super process for fifteen statute limitations begins to accrue there i mean that the limitation you're talking about is a sequence of filings if they wait until the appeal is concluded they have no problem bringing their complaint the c f c the only issue is the timing in the back but the problem is you're arguing in the c s e in that that th limitations on the taking actually kicked in sooner are you certainly arguing that now in this very so in other words you're putting in a no win situation you're saying wait and then you can make your argument later but we're going to then argue that it's too late well there's a question about how to construe their complaint and they the allege what appears to be a taking resulting from the district court decision that are a blue brief i'm sorry read brief talks about the statue of limitations going back to the time of the band and then but that's under our theory of the case except in their complaint as alleging a taking stemming from the district court's decision it's not clear that the statute of limitations has run out on that or has begin to roll in for example it's just not a settled question when the schedule imitation is begins for that there's no doubt in your brief you say for instance is a case pending between the time the court issues of decision and the right to seek an advance you know that occurs will clearly is still pending because no mandate is issued we haven't entered that judgment that akin to the district court judgment that closes the case and then you pose a hypothetical well is the case not still pending when the time for sir is running after our mandate issues but if it is the case we're just still tending then nobody would have to follow our ruling because they would be able to say no the case is still pending i don't have to seek a stay from the court of appeals or from the supreme court because i don't have to go ahead and listen to what the court of appeals said if the matter was still pending wouldn't that be the cane no i mean the good judgments of various stages can have sex outside the context of section fifty hundred i mean there are depending on state law there may be collateral estoppel effect from a district court judgement even though it may be on appeal so i think it's a different context to ask whether parties have to obey the mandate of this court they certainly do whether parties have to obey a judgement absent a stay of the judgement is certainly do but when we make those those concepts don't translate so perfectly into the context of fifteen hundred which you know being a waiver of of the government sovereign immunity has to be construed and in favor of immunity if there's any ambiguity and let their actions brought by a relative or on behalf of the united states are not brought against the united states so there is no waiver of sovereign immunity that can have construction doesn't come into play in that context i think we've discussed kerry the south pole but has to boston five sense i also has to has an obligation to exercise jurisdiction that has the obligation exercised jurisdiction trumps the waiver of the candidate instruction and we've talked about the situation where the brand other property owners are