order reads the or the decision of the industrial commission is reversed and remanded and given instruction based focus of the one that's really the issue we know this is where a slight to decide what arbitrator colwell and set in his or or said to us in the in the oral argument which was he'd reverse only as to the medical whether medical bill should be awarded that's not in the record because  he said because there is no standard record record of the argument he said he was bound by the strict provisions of that order that was written which i believe we all felt was sufficient even a commission we the point is if that is a final order then i should have appealed the order but as it's written i follow the procedures properly there was remember there was record when when it was remitted to the commission that there was no hearing no briefs anything the commission just on its own interpret in that order entered a new order is that what happened that is right and it would certainly have been argued we just got the decision without any s our argument regarding the facts and you read the file and you know what's going on my client prove every aspect fire on the worker's compensation act accident notice cause and connection everything you start over release through the to the industrial commission would be appropriate so that all this can be straightened out again judge homo did state in the second time which is february of this year old tonight and he basically said i'm to real disadvantage her interpreted judge call was order to me it's a really had on all issues including accident and you are who should be the judge caldwell's order was wrong in your should have done it because it was weakens the manifest way thing he did was remanded for medical expenses incented be compelled to sign only that but it's one of the other i would prefer obviously to have a national commission decision reinstated the first one look at counsel's breeze and i don't see anything in there in the one page argument in the brief there argues that judge holwell was in the air or when he issued either one of the two remember correctly we won partially an issue of medical bills on the second circuit and in the commission vacated some of the average years of war in medical bills because they had found that after a certain date i believe in beginning two thousand and  the islip asked for accident the bills relating to that were denied they want those bills never reinstated and that's why i responded to argue that based upon that original commission finding they should have taken it to the next logical step which was if you're denying the medical bills after the ice fall then you shouldn't find that there's any causal connection either after the ice fall why deny the medical treatment after the ice fall but still find it just close the connection after the ice that she reversed the entire work finding no accident no positive action all benefits were vacated except we got each a credit so the only respectfully speaking the only person here i think you this confusion as to as to why we're here with the outcome is is to what happened i'm quite happy with the results it's not my appeal thank you