provider may be recertified that the enrollment information correctly on file with medicare is correct but no new enrollment applications require so often that because the seems to me that either five to restrict payments submitted during the deactivation or revocation period and we actually cited to a case in our three branch and l morgan and there was an earlier the district court erred in not throwing up its hands i want to talk for a little bit about the deference that's appropriate in this case the these regulations i guess what i would say is when you look at the regulations you know our position is that they are on him big us because they make it clear that they work together big creator regulation and specifically delineate between supposed to look at it to see if there was any official position by the regulatory on that on that issue of example the the secretary has said that there's a case t many can terminate services you can reapply after being convicted of a felony you can say that there's nothing new in your application at all or you can apply as a new and rollie all of those his privileges were never revoked correct me if i'm wrong is partnership agreement stays intact so he's never kicked you out it's very hard for me in that context where he just ends up checking  then what's really happening is he's just getting restored he doesn't have to start at square one again and that would seem to be consistent with the correct me if i'm wrong he doesn't well more than a year ago he's going to run into a problem with that regulation additionally he hasn't sought in this case or any other proceedings to challenge the denial of any particular point all he's seeking here is to get a different kind regulation was initially cumbersome when worded and that's why when the agency your advice did and it reads it now as it is on and then them for it just cleans it up and says you need to submit an enrollment application in all these circumstances that's what we meant initially they're sorry for the poor phrasing we're trying to clarify that now there's no substance of change between those two but even if you thought that there was some difference between an enrollment application and or be one can be two it still is the fact that he submitted an enrollment application even if you think that there should be a difference the only but even if you think that well the agency was confused about what this particularly was i think the evidence refute but still the question is what's his effective date because as a plane the entire medicare regulations here are made to made sure that we're only reimbursing claims of which we can be sufficiently certain that operating the scheme as a whole on hundreds of thousands or millions of claims a year that we have these rules generally set up to make sure that all the information is going to be accurate that we're going to be able validate the approximately three million dollars worth of services were provided appropriate it's not whether or not they were provided appropriately it's that allegation of three million dollars of being provided one was during a time when he didn't have filling privileges two was during a time when he didn't try to contest the activation three he's not challenging the denial of the particular point if you want to do that he could but dollars worth of claims and didn't get reimbursed you would notice on your account and would notice so you were these do we know i couldn't figure this out but do we know from the record wh i i didn't find something that wasn't there so that's good but exactly for all these reasons that we've been discussing i think the other prize or factors are fairly satisfied that implicates the agency substance of expertise about how to ensure that the claims are thank you thank you almost started talking with you know there are a couple points i want to make in response st there the secretary makes the argument that there was this was another type of enrollment application