good morning you know your honors may have pleased the court this case is about a depletion need auction and the parties have agreed on most of the components of that computation there are three issues exceeds that amount in fifteen percent the regulation has been around for you know with a lot of time like forty years now and there have been amendments   i'll just note the i think again the statutes are fairly clear that all processes or i think it's good to to just look at the statutory language because it on this issue it basically i don't know that's a distinction with significance frankly ok but i just have to make sure that i understand your response kerry care position is that that that process wraps and anything they have to purchase analysis of actual competitive sales by the taxpayer or others and so when we're making that weighted average computation we are plainly allow those sales those that constructive sale amount on the tax payers competitive sales that were made and i'll i want to point out and this is very significant actually is that do you want every serve the balance that you have for rebuttal ok i'll give you two minutes for rebuttal or even the times down a bit more i think you are right we'll hear from the government in transform something by state adding something she would like a new one or all that that is not a treatment process and it decided that neither the extract in iran or or at the purchase quartzsite in that case could cost of actually blending in those other ingredients those are that's not a treatment process either it was only treated as a treatment process in rudolf because there was a government stipulation as those governments did relation here it's not a treatment argument it occurs to me that everything about this is really all about roberson's run out leg the robertsons who is the largest foreign buyer for m c c robertson alone  record that compels the conclusion that it should be allowed to constructively increase the price charged tomatoes and ignoring that reduced rate was the tax court compelled by this record the record that tax that the taxpayer put to find that the representative rate the m c c would have charged an identical unrelated bond or find that same quantity and type of cement in the open market there would have been ten dollars a ton higher with no problem start talking about robertson's this large mining buyer is the only large point in buyer in the record they have no other proof of any but what any other large fine buyer buy it's like saying well this person who bought a single small john mayonnaise wants you know they would never gotten the cost of pies if they bought the gigantic huge saying of well you know we just don't know from the record anything other than that there's one large wine burner in the record it's large fine buyers did in the market the india that you aggregated data from the industry but you can't break down by type and i think the tax court does a great job going through and explaining look these are all chemical a distinct for clear error here but you don't have that record you don't have that still in the world room and what we will we have is somebody who didn't put on any expert testimony to tell you what this market was really like to disaggregate with this data is to tell you between the different types and we don't have any expert to say oh no these are number one those differences are personally significant or number two here is the type of adjustment made to back out the difference and make those sort of adjustments in the regulations require so in this case given what evidence we have regarding the industry standards and where the industry operate ok mr jenks you have to minutes thank you so i'd like to start off by used to addressing the robertsons argument made the regulations are get to select the price at which they sell the product that is and it isn't at all what is contemplated by the regulations in fact regulations expressly require that control group sales be ignored in a constructive don't have to be essential a product but my point that i made earlier is that the data upon which the calculation confrontation is made will literally was and so there isn't a problem with specific requirements of the regulation become plain is limited by the government to say well we think that discount and we think that you should you should say that saying they're hanging their hat on if those two other riot ellen southwestern lake and also supports the taxpayers argument and we ask that this or reverse thank you for your argument in the end this matter will stand submitted thank you and you