morning the first man we have listed forty is united states of america versus shaka junior in this facts and know the facts of the procedural aspects of this case so probably best to address ourselves to the legal issues that have been raised by you and that have been raised by writing as well  entrepreneur terminated what i said in that recording of the quote in the government brief as when this all comes out i'm referring to i was arguing to the school district that there may have been a breach of contract regarding regarding your contractual relationship between i had an apartment that cost several thousand dollars a month at perfect credit they had no reason there's nothing in the record that suggested i would ever walk away from my job for you know without without specific opportunity i was looking at the possibility of opening a competitor  and so doing i'd hand legal advice and i was continuing to do my job every single day between nine and five and i had not given any notice to my employer delaware valley school my plan was to raise funds and in employment or some other type of business relationship i would there is no dispute between the parties or and this director that i as of the day of february twenty nine forty five i was still a consultant working for delaware valley high school through a relationship with one of their related entities that this issue qualified a government which an age appropriate least three federal laws created a situation where i can no longer do my job my job i was in charge of longer needed i was on my seventh contract and thirty's who was the delaware valley high school and i just certainly thinking about the possibility of leaving but i had not taken any concrete steps related to my  absolutely the correct analysis of this which is that there is a difference between a news story about a search warrant or leave their women been in years every if the news hadn't been there maybe they would just be rumors coming out of the building some stories but not every and every person or every entity who is search is also gradually target and those are two legal theory quite far from i in the sense that there are as he was pointing out there was a direct link of the actions of the government to the fees of have maybe wouldn't have it even if it wouldn't have the argument seems to be that this would affect refuge good for his reputation and therefore had a subsequent effect on earning potential as to prospective employers prospective income are ultimately resulting in his inability to years later when the sixth amendment primary attaches to have counsel a choice that seems quite far in terms of the theory from some well  what what proper up any kind words made by mr karr either juncture either the initial motion to dismiss the indictment which led to  after the story and the government denied that they had anything to do with the leak and so that really cut off that for that line of inquiry that discussion  you know there are you know me if you come to the worst it's the market in ten o'clock tomorrow you'll see something that we were writing about and then there is what happened here which is months of sharing of information you know assuming they decided to record their holding appears to be based on the intentional conduct of the government in fact inspired as are all they apply a nexus test that's in the course another opportunity to put flesh on the bones of his argument that he wants to make now i have not made it previously by any means that would suggest that or would be justified in exploring it further and i would submit to this court that the reason grand jury material i gather from your oral argument though that you're also contending that the subsequent sixth amendment violation could inform the dip a violation of