so please go ahead in morning everyone i'm not going to repeat to rehash the brief i think the brief was pretty comprehensive i tried to make it notice from the court that they felt they could rule without so it must have been comprehensive for the court but i just would like to focus on make a few points and if the court has any questions of the having to answer them i think there are several issues which would warrant this court concluding the case that this point there are some issues that the court didn't deal with that would be i think court said we know that there's drug use but it was prescribed drugs it wasn't in the court disregarded that evidence at trial so reading that authority in the congress if it's not prescribed it would be illegal and in terms of the social security administration would not entitle him to disability benefits so there's that  issue i think on the issue of the substantial gainful employment which is what this court previously in the earlier decision was most interested reading his report that what the court missed was something called job transfer ability skills which he had a considerable job transferability skills as a dentist  in the effort mars report gives several good jobs that he could have worked and with a good salary with his job transfer ability but moreover in his deposition which was taken about two months before this particular petition was filed it needed and he said i can work but i'm too busy with my legal problems  to go out and look for a job so expert myers comports with the debtors own testimony and i think at that particular time he said he could be a dental assistant and so to expert myers and it's a good job to get with the figures were even about fifty thousand dollars a year in terms of expert myers i believe he should have been allowed for a couple of reasons but i mean he was there he was scheduled for testimony it would have taken me about forty five minutes to put his testimony on it wouldn't have been a leslie de lay but kind of educated all of us no one not even the court really knew what was going on with the s s they records and what they based their decision on for the determination of disability and what records were none of us knew any of that even the court acknowledged that i believe she informed us that there are special people who review these reports and and testify at the s s a hearings and so forth it was at that point  file your opinion a file and i did about four months before his testimony nobody said anything nobody objected to him and then of course on the day that hearing that there's attorney filed a motion to exclude and i was a little surprised at that but in any event i think what the court was looking for was just that type of testimony and he provided it i think sufficient enough to itself i think the court itself judge month she acknowledged at one point in the transcripts that i provided that i needed all those s s a records everybody pretty much agreed on that and then she excluded me from him to me from getting them because she punished me for something that i didn't do and she claimed that it was my fault that we didn't get those records when it wasn't it was theirs and it was the court's fault it was the debtors fault was always blocking me from discovery i wanted to do and the court made a mistake about who that continued illegal drug use is not title to the presumption and we have an expert who's said without any question there are other jobs that he could have done and there was never any order i think i cited it for the debtor to sign a new fresh release when the s s a attorney got involved he said no no you do it all wrong here's how you do it and i contacted her and said tell me how to prepare the then change his mind didn't want to do it in the court didn't force it so i think i had a right to expect order would have been in force that there would have been a fresh release sign and the record would have been obtained part of the a maybe a limited harsher reopening for just the expert testimony from mr meyer but the court kind of shot that down pretty quickly you know i think a lot of this some of this maybe this case has been around for a long time i think you know the courts want to move on or but i think that the court could have it would have been very little extra effort to allow him ok i think we have a good handle on your case from your brief and what what you said today so thank you very much the matter is submitted will be sending a written decision in due course thank you thank you thank you