past attempts to work in their records submitted for him a job that he had that showed significant limitations that were consistent with his allegations l j it made no mention of these records in the decision now this violates and i'm thankful for the way you put your point here that you said the the employment records from what was it from bon ton yes you know showed mr dunn significant limitations yes ok that's what i'm not so that's what i'm not sure about ok they definitely they definitely as you lay out in their brief they show difficulties with the employment rate with issues with supervisors and not performing the job and what have you but how do they address significant limitations in other words how to how do we connect what what happened and why it may have happened and his experience at bon ton with any functional worse for me i didn't exactly know why but the kinds of things that he said he had problems with you know he would he would forget instructions if he in the work records show for example that he that he limitations you see in the records are consistent with the diagnosis of the mild cognitive impairment which causes problems with memory and executive function these are the same kinds of problems he was having he was he frequently should have to work late and he made that connection in his testimony that he said he was doing that because he would forget he had to go to work he would get in the car and drive and forget where he was supposed to go so it so it's the calm it's how the way we get to a failure if there is one on the ale jay's part with respect to the consideration of kind of functional limits if you will step two is through the combined failure to piece claimant's testimony together with the information that comes from the employment record but i think the medical evidence is also a factor here as well you know he eventually did have the neurological examinations and the results of those  s performed poorly now what i understand it has to be is that you show a person a map person of my time take away from them ask them questions about it immediately and then after five minutes ask the questions again so his performance on  nation in the st place he would remember everything asked of him and then after five minutes on the st examination you know he remembered one thing on the nd he only remembered to sew it in a work environment you know if a supervisor gives you four things to do and you can remember them all in the st place then after five minutes you remember them and you're not going to be able to same work are going to have problems and i think that those test results are consistent with the with the records you see with the indications in the work record at the hearing how long did mr dunn testify i don't know the exact amount of time it was a fairly short hearing where i think i can put the right sure if you could my question goes to the idea of him not being  not including that the information the evidence with regard to the bon ton employment history is that something that also could have been   and then the attorney said that if you like it's a period from the record they'll do is not familiar with them he had to review them the claims attorney said if you like i can brief this for you after the hearing and they 'll say said that will be necessary i understand it but you are stupid he didn't make any reference to it in the in the decisions and i think you know i think the claim was entitle to have some reference to that in the decision you know if you look at it  claims perspective he got what he thought were the distraught what was the strongest evidence of his inability to work he brought it in gave a detailed j got a denial from social security that made no reference to what he thought was the strongest evidence and he was entitled to some record as to what should we make something of this difference between the two scales that dr drew is accused medical term mild versus the agency definition he sounds like he had a binary  the way i see it there are really three parts of this record there's claims allegations which show up in his paperwork even a stray ssion and testimony as well as statements of his daughter that have medical evidence and they have to work records and they get to put all those three things together so when the commissioner talk about anything being inconsistent with the record i don't think they can really make that argument because they all day all together failed to address what i think is really a significant rd part of the record they'll get has to consider everything together and come to a conclusion on his own as far as the work records not making the connection with the medical condition there's no reason that work record would employers really aren't looking at why a person is doing poorly they're just saying that person is doing poorly so when you look at everything doesn't make any mention of that far as caring for the grandchildren his daughter testified that she come home and he would have forgotten to change the kid's diapers with driving he said he would get the current theories going so they  listed a whole lot of things that since you don't was capable of doing when you really look at his allegations in the file he wasn't capable of doing these things very well at all and had significant limitations and even basic daily  that's not something that showed up in the earlier c t scan that the state of the doctors had access to so no doctor even opinion functional imitations have seen this and no doctor who gave an opinion was even aware of the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment so i think because those things were submitted they also had a duty to rather than independently interpret the evidence seek another opinion and so you know what does this mean functionally that there are no other questions thank you much marvin thank you mr