Certainly. I am very sorry.
One important thing to bear in mind with respect to the litigation is that the World Trade Organization's obligations under the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, which the U.S. was found to have violated, are very similar in some respects to the obligations in U.S. law. The United States implemented those obligations in U.S. law when it adopted the WTO agreements. The decision at the WTO is, I think, persuasive, analogous and on point. It is something we can bring before the NAFTA and CUSMA panels to argue that the decision is also equally inconsistent with United States law. There are different standards of review in the two systems, but there is a lot of parallel between the legal obligations.