witnesses of the state and in his testimony we asked him specific questions about for instance the criteria for selecting engineers attend training well counsel in my recollection are they in that position testimony as he said there are no hard and fast rules it depends on the situation as to who was selected for training programs and then the additional evidence explained specifically what the situation was so what and labyrinths but i don't understand that to be a contradiction where's the contradiction are required yes so i thought summary judgment was a trial that he came forth to supplement or contradict or explain what was said a trial will have the opportunity to ask questions and a jury would effectively determinations well there's no there's not a credibility question because there's not an opposing affidavit that says that the things that are explained as to why he wasn't selected were not true correct and then there was an explanation of why he was not selected that was a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason so then it would be up to him to show that that moving papers it was part of a supplemental the collaboration that was presented and at that point there was nothing we could do we had to submit on what was already before the court and the procedural posture was that are you saying that the motion for summary judgment the motion the sum for summary judgment that was granted was not was was filed before discovery was ended various engineers that were mentioned in the that and the supplemental declaration so that you could find out you know maybe that you had a different take on that for them did i ask for more time i did not  british were given time but each filed his brief and now in the additional briefing that had the supplemental because ration that's not when we felt with somebody because we now have good morning me please the court michele logan stern with the office of the attorney general for the department of conservation in this case is not unique this is a case where there was a resident  request for a rule thirty be sick designee is a very general category it's a training in the underground injection control unit and so we bought our person who was most knowledgeable about training and you i see and that person was a manager who supervise all of the supervisors who made the training decisions so he was a part of each supervisor decision making and therefore could basically he said it all depends on what he said and the later declarations explain you know the specifics of the different training programs we selected so and so because he did it for acting and so on and so forth and he said they don't depend on and then they give specific reasons that are criteria that are applied right my question i guess is whatever you do you agree that there was no request for reopening your recollection yes he did ask for more time however it was not after the supplemental briefing he asked for more time after the close of discovery before the supplemental briefing and then what happened with the sacramental briefing is that he presented no evidence he presented no evidence as to discrimination and retaliation other than his conclusory statement that i was denied training i was denied participation on the special teams and it was because of my race and because i complained there was hardly evidence that he presented his declaration he didn't even specify which training he was denied and what special teams he was denied and then in response to in his reply brief essentially he attaches a declaration that starts to specify specific training and and special teams that he was deprived of the opportunity of participating and so the judge said ok wait a minute i don't have any information about these things because it's coming at this very end of our process and so he asked for supplemental briefing on this specific area with regard to the training and  special teams and then he gave us the burden to start and we didn't even know what we were addressing and so what we did was we went to all of the supervisors and we said can you please look up every training that you do you sent people to for these number of years every special teams that were created tell us who you sent and why and why wasn't an opportunity to file sort of responding declarations after about he did present a responding declaration as part of his supplemental briefing ok and in that responding declaration correct he said i didn't make the decision here's who made the decision here's the create the factors that they would have looked at in making the decisions but i don't know exactly how they applied these that yes and he named them specifically so how much time remained with discovery in the discovery period after the thirty six position i can't answer that question of this have my head what i do know is that  deposition had not taken place by the time we filed our motion for summary just leave the deposition took place on january th have twenty eight team and the discovery that can't be right stop right i believe it is your honor because the judge actually had to continue everything yeah ok because that was past the original cutoff date to  and so they had apple up employ opportunity to obtain the information that he would need to present a case demonstrating that there were trainings and special teams and that he was deprived of opportunity  to participate and that the reason that he was deprived of that opportunity was based on his race or because he made complaints he didn't obtain any of that information even with regard to our designee deposition there was no information in there that would tend to show that it was for anything other than a legitimate reason so if his strategy was to depend on there not being anything specific and not as specific as information provided later by other witnesses then is just considered correcting supplementing and explaining and it is in this little evidence if there's nothing further i don't believe there are any additional questions thank you thank you mr it cannot tell you how far somervell time remaining on the issue of retaliation we board briefed what was an additional retaliation it was during that additional briefing that were saying that they had the declare ration from these o the substance of what he was going to testify prior to coming to testify it was based on that he was out specific questions ok what did you find out from there and he did not give any details he just so anybody can tick can make a decision and say i don't want you to attend and was so that decision of not allowing him to attend was based  retaliation for his participating in the protected activity thank you counsel i think we understand your position and your time has expired we have once again the