we will go to mr law he's he's following that so we will watch the clock and we'll start with the  shoot today i presume is the question of the flail families relinquishment and the other from solid data or that is the one dealing with the intervention question swiss previously argued before the case was set down and i'm going to limit my comments today to that question the government of iran argues that mr plato has relinquished his right the southern district of california which is at issue here he also holds a garnishment in the eastern district of virginia a garnishment nice district of virginia as against kubic it's for the is regulated and we take exception to that to start with a regulated activity under requires a license it is in fact a complex licensing mechanism if a terrorist state like you rand wishes to engage in a financial transaction in the united states that activity requires a license that the us or its corresponding us the entity in the transaction must attain it is undisputed here that neither iran nor kubrick has applied to the treasury for a licensed a for sure all right this cannot be a regulated has done that that is an unregulated activity below in proceedings before judge brewster iran argued that perhaps kubrick needed a license but cuba has not applied for a feel now i would suggest to the court that kubic didn't go out and commit a felony and went out and obtained a bombed in the ordinary course because it understood that the matter was not regulated because it's not regulated there was no relinquishment by mr twenty six million dollars in blocked a rainy and assets by act of congress relinquished his right to attach in this kind of activity to enforce the balance of this judgement and we are arguing that it is not part of the description of what a regulated activity is under sixteen ten the best evidence of that is no one has a license and those are the licensing mechanisms now congress point should a license have issued because that is it that may well be a dispositive question here if there is a license that is required it's not iran's license they have an absolute unqualified right under the new york convention to bring this proceeding if a license is required it would be a cubic it would be on the other end but that would call in question the vitality of the garnishments that we've launched against kubic in the eastern district of virginia because that would be the regulated activity it would be the payment but the proceeding we have before us what was heard before  judge brewster expressively excluded activities an eastern district judge brewster properly pointed out in that proceeding has no jurisdiction to comment on proceedings in the eastern district of virginia the question is whether  the judgment lien that is a lien against this on regulated activity requires a license iran doesn't have one iran is not required to get one what would happen under that scenario iran's shoes the activity that kubic should have gotten a license for that is the making of this pawn in the payment no longer becomes a regulated transaction because mr flayed overcomes the party an interest to the judgment itself the bond with then paid to mr flayed all the lawful making of of the on really becomes a prior technical violation of the act factual question i believe we took this very issue up when we were discussing the unusual circumstances of this case and the appropriateness of intervention in the head we've been of title the intervention we would have been allowed to participate in the mediation so i can't comment on that i time now i would point out however that the licensing doesn't seem to be relevant at this point is that all property of the subject of the growth ofac regulations all property and all transaction interest in the property well the real issue the issue is that we've actually gotten a judgment in against kubic so if we were able to actually get the money for that judgment then it would be subject to the under the regulations can only be at this point can only be asserted outside the united states blocked and so far as i know the new york convention is totally has nothing to do with it so far as i think they will determine when you say they're all blocked how are you defining blocked and well some in front of it then i don't see any reason why all cyclists would deny in fact there's a case on point where in southern california recently and iranian banking banking institutions sold a real estate property and when the  a few years ago your honor we got a judgment in a similar situation and we applied for a license and there was granted without any  are either impounded by the treasury and held by the treasury or funds that are held paths private lending institutions under express instruction from the treasury second is a question of law all arena and assets in the united states are not subject to regulation only the assets that fit within the description of the statutes outlined in section sixteen ten you they have said it becomes regulated after doing when and they decide to transfer funds it's the movement of funds outside the united states in which the governments of the united system that was put in place by congress and indeed i think the intent of congress is is reflected in this mechanism congress would not have of forwarded parties like mr flayed or the opportunity to either take a hundred never transfer it out of the united states they just hold it and suspended in the united states then it would never be subject to regulation that's correct  van patten taking the lead for m o d in this case we're trying to see if we can figure out what's going on or why you're doing that i'm going to try to see if i can get  hearing on line and if it's on you can hear me baldwin traveling man's case traveling man's case it's clear that a defense a defendant has a right not to appear when there's no subject matter jurisdiction and attack the jurisdiction later on and that's well and i understand and it has always been the case far as i know that subject matter jurisdiction can be raised either by the parties or by the courts themselves and in fact the issues so it's basically a matter of  separation of powers because when by the district court making a decision on the basis of a lot of this and exist there arrogating well not arrogating perhaps but taking the district court here it seems to me that you have a real problem well your honor i think that subject matter jurisdiction goes to the authority the very power of the court and the court is taking the power of the legislature can found that the district courts were acting improperly and not in accordance with the law therefore there was no subject matter jurisdiction and the judgments  incorrect analogy the correct analogy is to indian tribes i believe and that's that that's a position of the ninth circuit at least of the district court in the ninth circuit and the sixth circuit the problem as follows to the extent that indian tribes are discussed in the constitution they seem to be recognized as having a state is outside its parameters indian tribes are treated as entities with whom to have commerce and to make or permits attachment are you familiar with that argument that we wade catchment with that statute itself doesn't want to do with a device that that's precisely what happened after time of the revolution especially the assets was ready to be delivered however you want but not take delivery because of the lack of communication between the government american national who was assassinated by agents of iran because cyrus was advocating no free and democratic iraq and dr matter jurisdiction under the statutes upon which a sovereign immunity has been way to or has been eliminated in the case of terrorist states in the case instances of opinion by the district of columbia circuit court of appeals the court's sceptically found that there was subject matter jurisdiction and that not quote from the court's opinion we're perm the judgment of the district court section sixty five eighty seven of the aggregates foreign sovereign immunity and provides jurisdiction and specified circumstances that is scipio the d c circuit went on to find that the statutory provision and the federal statutory provision although it waived sovereign immunity and abrogated foreign sover immunity creating subject matter jurisdiction in the district courts the d c circuit found that the statute did not create a federal cause of action but i think it i judgment by iraq i think it should be very clear here that iran certainly was accorded all its due process rights even if it is assumed that iran is a person for purposes of constitutional an seized or frozen by the united states under the trading with the enemy act but also under sections two zero two and two zero three of the international emergency economic powers act which is  would constitute a block asks that because that is an asset that is frozen under section specifically under section three of the i e p a that section gives the president authority to investigate regulate or prohibit any transactions or transfer of assets of countries for the united states has  blocked or frozen assets and i think it's clear under the regulations implementing section two zero three of the i eat a that a judgment against iran is property that we have raised other arguments and other provisions of the foreign sovereign immunity zakk which would allow us to attach the judgment that iran has and i think most particularly the fact that award arising from a commercial transaction and therefore it would come within the commercial exception either under sixty seven or under sixteen ten  origins were military in nature but no longer i think our reasoning and our briefs are fully set forth and i will not doubt her in the court with me for their argument on that score all right thank you thank you very much time of the expired on both  cases where the defendant was not sovereign immunity so there's under the f d i c miers and flamingo cases that were out of this district it's clear there's a two step analysis first sovereign immunity then thank you all right thank you thank you