record the judge here said he had no severe impairments that were in effect could not as a bill for purposes of a disability claim we disagree with that we believe that the record establishes abundant evidence from track his assessment at step to the severity assessment with that of two doctors who did not meet mr mcculloch did not examine him they reviewed only the records that they had before them at the time but we see from the record if we look at the dates however the doctor came who did the orthopedic or the physical exam i believe is an orthopedist and doctor when who does a lot of the psychiatric assessment around here on record examinations record person referred to a number of disability claims that somebody with a personality disorder is in fact found to be disabled first on those based on those types of personality disorders this inability to get along with others the inability to  take instruction and guidance from somebody in a supervisory position he lose his job after job after job because he gets in a fight with his boss is asked to his let's assume for sake of argument seems clear that he has an anti social that's not why he would be paid it's because of the determination that he needs equals a listening level impairment either by itself or income of a overstated the point that i think you see my point usually the ones we have come in here it's because they can't do the job right here he's got a new social characteristics which we find very often in other areas that we reveal and is that sufficient  this is something he is unable to overcome and therefore he is not qualified to work that's correct your honor and we have diagnoses from qualified physicians who are true or treat no positive test no objective findings and therefore he was going to reject treating physician then you have the other physicians in there sort of mixed can they all j then choose what sounds right to him as far as the medical doctors reports he's playing doctor rather than ministry of logic he certainly has a fact finding ability that's obviously that's his role but where you have as you pointed out with some of the c e o s a complicated exam there's a bit of a reasonable would be sustained on the other hand if the record as a taken as a whole does not support that then of course we would argue that the correct decision would be into reverse that and that is in fact what we're saying because we think that the weight of the to your point is they can't stop at step two he's got to keep going we felt that he entered at step two and should have continued on and in fact as you see from the brief and even argued that step three that mr mccullough satisfied step three and that the court should consider reversal with direction to pay benefits based on a finding that he is disabled as a matter of law but for purposes of argand i'm trying to argue the point that that was the basis for  what he's saying there and what the doctors are saying is that his inability to work was caused by i and so that to me is another reason to question him to really wonder in my mind how can he then say that he has at step two that he has no severe impairments this is this finding it seems to me undermines that this kind of with complaints that were not justified or were magnified that itself can be when properly diagnosed determined to be either meeting or or equaling a listing or taken in combination with other elements might point towards disability but no they're not they're not giving out money to people who are faking illnesses your own if that's what you're getting well and one of the other career medical  fit here nicely because they use the term of the i don't fail jaded here tends to exaggerate his condition which suggests that he's really just doesn't want to work and lingering but it's really not significant limitation on your ability to work why is mr mccullough not working he says he became unable to work on march fourth of two thousand and what happened that day that day he was fired from his job and his tools were stolen and he was hauled off to jail for getting into an altercation with his manager after that he came back and he found out that his tools had been stolen later he says that seventy to eighty thousand dollars worth of uninsured tools were stolen from him that's in the record at three fourteen at three fifty three and three seventy six so he just gave up he's been an auto mechanic all his life he worked with his dad on cars left him unable to work and that's in the record that when he won also in march two thousand he told the caregiver that he was angry about his tools being used on that's when he went to get some treatment at that time because he was feeling suicidal after spending four days in jail and getting out and getting fired and then finding out that his tools had been stolen but at that point he told the caregiver that he was angry about six thousand dollars worth of tools that had been stone he was given paxil and added then  for the treatment after that the next medical records that we see in the records are a year later in may of two thousand and one dr hanly performed a consultation physical examination lift carry handle objects and travel dr hanly suggested the possibility of an underlying psychiatric disorder since he found nothing physically wrong with him he made no psychiatric diagnosis however in fact in the psychiatric exam he found normal thought processing normal understanding judgment memory in effect all normal and that's in the record at one fifty seven and we know that there was no significant mental impairment because less than two weeks before dr hanley's evaluation dr carroll performed a concentrated psychiatric evaluation dr carroll concluded that mr mccullough had an antisocial personality disorder in there just some difficulty in social occupational school functioning but generally touching pretty well and had some meaningful interpersonal relationships and dr carroll commented that it appears well that he has found his your debility and physical pains have left him unable to work or over here they're not bad enough that he started the treatment for them so there was no medical records at all he said no treatment for a year so based on the medical evidence in the record the l j used special technique know from the regulations at twenty c f r four zero four hundred twenty eight lowercase d one the regulations state that if we raise the degree of your limitation in the first three functional areas as none or mild and none in the fourth area we will generally conclude that you are impairment is not severe unless the evidence otherwise indicates that there is more than a minimal limitation in your ability to do basic work activities downside  i think you have a good argument on the medical part on my concern is more with the finding that was made the sad rate let's see if you could focus on that for a moment or there is some discussion about living off his girlfriend's disability check for thirteen years i found absolutely nothing in the record about about that maybe it's in there but i i was unable to find it but and i am not overly impressed that in the year two thousand that he told his doctor he like to be on disability most people who were hurt would like to be on disability what concerns me is whether the short at step two and he should have continued on and that we'd have to send it back for a continuation of the hearing why is it that these these statements that we can study under our law the test of what we have to  and then he testified at the hearing that two months prior he weighed two hundred fourteen pounds so he was steadily gaining weight over this period that he said he had diarrhea so one would logically conclude that if someone had i read that you're going to be losing weight what i think that you need to argue is whether this demonstrates the clear and convincing evidence that we require in order to tip over the claimant's crowd credibility how would you argue that this is a clear and the caregiver there that he was at work when he was hit in the calf and he also said that he went on in the works for the rest of the day and didn't seek out medical help and until the end of the day so he's talking about working that he was at work when he got hit with this metal leveling run and then at the hearing when the l g a asked him about this you know wait a minute you were at work when you were hit with this leveling run it was no no no i was just helping a friend on lots of wood you know we were just unloading would example another example is the elgin noted that he said he never worked at all he said you work after your alleged nonsense that you said no no no i didn't i didn't work at all but his earnings record shown earnings in two thousand and two of seven hundred fifty two dollars and sixty eight cents for him that's not very much like to say that inconsistency by their nature are part and parcel of some i was asian as we see just above record twenty one the huge paragraph in the middle of the page mystery of our ju here inconsistency is part and parcel of that and so i believe that as i said earlier that the some very special severity criterion was met here and that there was there is sufficient information here in the record that the judge should have proceeded past step two and we may well have a case here had he probably developed this in which he would have an appropriate medical authority to try to look more closely and specifically at whether some of his ation disorder should have been considered here as well and that might have provided george wallace a bit better answer or explanation to some of the matters that concern you about inconsistency i can't explain all of those it is clear that my client has a record of two more substantive thank you