never forget i came to that i came to that conclusion after struggling with what it was that i wanted to bring to the attention of the court i've come up with at least one thing that i think is very apparent from the record and i've come up with something else that i don't believe is very apparent right point both of those ok i will the one thing that's very apparent from the record and i think is very key is that the district  exclusively with this that that decision stands that leads me to the point that i i think this is not apparent but i think it's very important that's the point that i want to make to the court this morning if you assume that the district  guam ruled correctly you take that and you add it to to issue any final orders if in fact that's what they were there invalid because neither one of those gentlemen how do you to do so then he concluded by saying basically if you're planning on filing what's called a thirteen point five action against agents of the f a a to contend that they did something beyond their authority he basically said don't bother so september nineteenth two thousand e mail were in fact orders if you put that ruling together with the admission here that neither mr ziglar nor mr canady were authorized to issue those final orders that the district court of guam found what you have is a situation where we asked for hearings under fourteen c f r thirteen point two that's essentially a due process that they are not final or for purposes of the petition for review we've taken for purposes of this argument that i'm presenting to the court for on the petition for review we have to assume that the order  that should have been followed the administrative procedure that should have been followed my client should have received a letter from the f a a the so that's something along the lines of you think you're doing something wrong here's what we  to me your client's biggest gripe and maybe one that continues to this is you didn't even get to talk to the f a a in a formal sense you never got noticed at the outset and then you never got a hearing to complain about not getting notice correct and that's why we court would have been an initial letter you're doing something wrong please respond and then the second step would be the f a a may say we disagree with your response so we're going to issue an order a direct telling you to stop what we think you know what they normally do that they didn't do it ok and then that then when you get that final order if it also invites the airman to respond to that if you disagree with this finding you have two weeks to do something the letter from clarence tonight is dated june of two thousand and two of the time the letter arrived at america up there's the owner was in the united states looking for a helicopter he returned to guam in july the following month and she want ok what i i what what i want is for the court to act on the petition for review and take these orders under consideration now the difficulty the difficulty in asking this court to do that i'm not asking whether you would ever get what would be your legal basis for i can't say i'm sorry here i can state the court as the statute that we believe would entitle us to compensation for the losses that were caused by these illegal orders my position before the court today is that have we gone through the process and we ended up before the measuring of law judge on thirteen point two and thirteen point five we would have the right to seek compensation for the  but that's not right and we're giving this to you so pay attention to it and how are we not supposed to think  and right can i go back later and say but i didn't really mean it well somebody gets a letter first an e mail from somebody who's currently a nothing official and then a letter or a letter different question when do these people get their day in court when privately should they have had an opportunity to complain to somebody about being put out of business without a hearing well we don't believe that they were put out of business without a hearing well i don't know what's right you know there wasn't a hearing so you're saying you don't believe they were put out of most if not by the government so that the airport authority was acting entirely on its own when they said you couldn't fly out of there and so this letter of regard to the helicopter pad on  for all flight operations they weren't supposed to paid any attention to that claim of no notice and hearing which would be an appeal if there were a final order it would be an appeal to modify and make it or something that final or so why wouldn't their district court claim for i went to the district court four days later i lawsuits were filed on september twenty third two thousand and two we didn't wait until december we don't wait around for anything other than i want to point out is that when the when the district court heard the government's motion to dismiss mr they ask