is her labor market reasonably stable when she is offered only one full time job after an expensive job search and that job is offered by the respond again there's no doubt that forms zero on a typing test presents a problem but that doesn't necessarily negate the overall situation that exists in this case to supply from child she wasn't qualified  i'm sorry point for a job she wasn't qualified for the typing test came up with a believe that was the epilepsy foundation of st louis  and of course she had testified that the job required fifty words per minute to vocational counsel was not aware of that the folk ational concert in testify that she did verify that there was a typing requirement for the job that vocational expert further testified that she could not verify or not verify whether it was fifty words per minute or not it is as a result of that that the typing test came out and june going to vocation that there vocational expert at that time brought her in to this  slice testified to too much i do know that june blain second trial testified that she felt that the petition the petitioner wasn't looking in the right places i don't know what to make  that other than the fact that you find i find it hard to believe that of all the context she made some two thousand and four so all the follow ups that she would could not have been what looking in the right places or some of them certainly had to be the right places she had in the first state or case when they remanded back for more job search they specifically noted that her job search advantage very well done that she had been cooperative so on and so forth so and if you just funded i mean the thing about this is and this is why i think that this court has ample support to find in this particular case that this one job offer by the respondent two weeks before trial that there was no reasonably stable labor market for her was first of all this woman was permanently restricted ask her a functional pasadena valuation to sedentary work with the additional restrictions of no healing crouching climbing and a sit stay and every alternate fifteen minutes i mean that alone so clearly restricts her labor markets well that would severely restrict anybody's labor market but certainly that alone severely restricted her labor market if you are the other thing about this job that he responded offered her to bits before trial was this particular job was open two times prior to it being open to weeks before trial in september of zero six and then again a full of the way they did not offer her that job at that time moreover again i think this is important is when the responded interviewed the petitioner for the q i job which is the one they offered they did not bring up to her at all the fact that she had a worker's comp case that she was undergoing vocational rehabilitation that she had permanent restrictions they interviewed only one client they are they they entered they offered her the job the next day the two witnesses for the respondent talked about the interview the case law that we're all familiar with it talks about the job themselves to be championing the position was created to avoid the award that it responded would want in this case there's no doubt the job is legit change she didn't roll the dice to see if the job offer which would be a sham she rolled the dice to to determine whether or not she did it whether the labor market was stable as that term is defined or should i say market we have to talk about this particular petition or play a part so certainly doubt are and i will tell your honor that not only can they do it after they were found to be viable for the total once went to the commission comes back down eight more months of a job search another thousand contacts they can hired i mean let's keep in mind that before the first trial literally one week before the first trial they terminated their first vocational expert and then to four can take away everything that we're reviewing the subsequent here and she made dillon that well not only in her opinion but all her job search records are actually in the record and she actually did make contact with all these employers she actually did go to actual interviews  jackson did follow up with employers seven or eight hundred times i mean after all procreational expert after vocational expert will testify that following up with employers after making contact is a very important part of the vocational process and so i did good job because for well number one her permanent restrictions severely restricted her labor market right off the bat i mean she's restricted said gary busey alternate stand so that alone she's heard the term labor market is severely restricted but in addition to that at the course of the time the market the labor market was not quite full but the from not something other than that responded that which significant i mean they responded came up with this job offer two weeks before trial and i guess it's i think arguably you could argue no but i will tell you that in this particular case that that happened she would have taken a job economy is for someone to search for a job for six months certainly it's now states now once the and i will say council after the first the first decision which i believe the trial suspicion from the second trial she went into great detail as to why she did not find the job search legitimate and diligent she found that you know a year without any efforts by the petitioner presents you know that i send out type of thing you send them out lines you don't follow up there's probably numerous other people applying for that same job that are making the phone call and they're trying to make some personal contacts out of all those contacts that she had theology and she also has a suppose to go according to our the person that she has to work with them would have been her supervisor on the staff she was considered a good employee and there was never any complaint about her work and yes that she ha for so i don't think there's anything to support her mental disability here it was a legitimate job offer made by the employer the petitioner herself remove troops out from the job market for one year arbitrator that tech she was permanently and totally disabled and in the hindsight she's getting criticized by subsequent parts that she did continue one vocational rehabilitation  certainly not to the extent that when she was under the form of a patient rehabilitation   he with regard to some of the things that were brought on council for you know the relatively recent case of the ameritech case here we got a gentleman who he refused to have surgery this particular case which i myself would ask this court to find that this petitioner this case under her circumstances that there was no