taken a declaration from the respondent and in the process of writing the brief in february we discovered that there were additional facts that we wanted to put into the respondents declaration so for decades completely collapsed it lost all of its funding it was squandered by the director they had no more money to i have attorneys do the work that had six one accredited representative yes you're on the right is what it's all determination is that not when when did notice occur we certainly did say in those cases that it doesn't begin to run and tell you consult with an attorney it's a factual determination that's when you have actual knowledge that there's a problem right and question just noonan and it's and i are asking here and i think that robinson asked you the same thing is why shouldn't we find as a matter of fact purposes of equitable tolling that was our initial intention or honor but when the client when we found that i don't know what issue exactly was declaration that we have suspended because we put a lot of energy into finding this accredited representative constitutes ineffective assistance that's what i'm going to need tells the details are important people who are struggling with is the fact that if she knew she had lost in december if she consulted with you  competent lawyer in january yes a competent lawyer should have recognized that the statute was running and that you better calculate the ninety days or whatever it is from december and now i guess you're telling us well we tried to get it done within that period of time but we couldn't because our client didn't get into the office quick enough to see just the revised declaration correct so essentially asking us to find equitable tolling based upon your clients and glaxo and your lack of diligence and pointing out to her that if you don't get in here by march the third you're going to be too late that's the government's but not knowing it's not good in knowing that you have an ineffectiveness of assistance of counsel clean are two wholly different matters because on the one case your decision you lose a case it could be for any reason but thank you so summary dismissal yet the motion to reopen that was filed or so it was called expense considerable effort not attacking the board's summary dismissal order but attacking the performance of mr as far a necessarily before the board probably because there was no appearance of a representative before the board you know any way shape or form so the passing mention of the representatives failed to file a brief really didn't place any factual circumstances change a issue that was the problem that went on in this case and i also would like one of the court that all of the information i got about one stop going out of business was not before the board it's before the board now on a motion to file f she was there when that happens she should be aware that that there was something amiss there as for art the fate of file a brief it says it clearly in the board's order of the same or third she should have gone to a lawyer immediately there was plenty of information available to her it doesn't turn on when she went to the lawyer it turns on when the reason the person in her circumstances did know or should have known that there was an issue or is this where it said so about foley's only appropriate and certain things to be on the aliens control prevent them from learning of the problem and in this case the information was right there in front of her the lady in waiting seven weeks to go see opposing counsel is inexcusable and if th