okay, so this is a news slide that we have not shown before, we're talking about the ual, the total ual, the ual payments, the layers, the timing and all that, this is showing as of the 2024 valuation, what all the different ual payments schedules look like and their stacked on top of each other. tells you the outstanding balance, how many years remaining and the payment. so we've seen what it looks like thoer those payments going until the end the 2046. so your, amorization schedules are very different from most of our system's. partially, because back in 2021, when you were more than fully funded at a market value basis, we looked at and reconsidered your funding policy and we shortened all of the current, at the time, assumption changes layers and all of the experience gains and loss layers as of 2021 to amortize them over a five year period. and you can see in 2024 and 2025, on top you have all the ual payment that's are positive, meaning you need to payoff set ual at the bottom, the negative are the. you have about 220 million dollars in the net ual payment 2024, but it's not diffe

chancespond that we are impr inserting a subjective element because we say reasonableness is assessed based ual facts of the officer new. that's not correct. our test is an objection -- objective releness onend claim texas makes.ected the if i can quote from page 641 of the u.s. report. the court says the qualified immunity inquiry "will often requirination of the information posses the surgeon officials, but it does not reintroduce into qualified immunity analysis the inquiry official subjective intent harlow sought to minimize." reports the officer will be making judgments authether the subject is entering -- about to do something in badai or dangerous. justiceagan: i assume you want to write an opinion that does not say anything about the weight given to the officer himself creating the danger. but i am trying to think, given the facts of this case, how an write avoids that questionto rely? ms. : the narrowest opinion this court would write would be prior circumstances er. they are part of the totality of circumstances. the fifth circuit did not recognize data. if the fifth circuts more meat