issues but the first issue that i would like to address is the application and the weight given to treating professionals in this case the second is to address the assessment of mr could chanos credibility as far as his pain testimony and the impact that that would have on his ability to perform in the national economy and the other is the validity of the vocational as first testimony in making  caetano is required to and we believe does meet the evidentiary burden that his disability existed before december thirty first two thousand and seven that is his date last insured and what that means is that because that's a state last insured all of his disability evidence must show that that existed prior to that if he is not disabled prior to that he is not eligible for benefits there is not a program that he is  apply to him it is undisputed that he has the following severe impairments a multi level degenerative disc disease and he's had surgery the  knee and a decompression he also has multi level treating physicians opinion is entitled to great or special weight because a treating physician has the opportunity to treat the patient and is not seeing the patient strictly for purposes of an evaluation but also to mr john always had an ongoing treatment relationship with a treatment facility called friends i'm clinic and doctors conor and dr hamilton have been part of that facility and they've been treating him since two thousand and three what happened in this case is the commissioner gave greater weight to two non examining file reviewing consultants doctors as well as  one time counsel to let's look at those reasons that the gave for discounting the treating physicians opinion so you mentioned dr conner who as i understand it from the record correct me  two different contradictory opinions one earlier in which he said that mr katana could perform like do the job and then a few years later said that he was disabled and so what's wrong with  the saying well i'm going to go ahead and credit that earlier opinion and that if the subsequent opinion there was an intervening period of time when mr tyler didn't go back to be examined by dr connors right well one of the things that happens spin pretty consistent when a doctor says someone can return to light duty doctor can never define what light duty was and so it would be very difficult for nayo j to then presume two thousand and eight and that inconsistency in two thousand and eight you look at the overall treatment record there was surgeries performed on mr tunnel spine and and on the cervical kariya and so part of that was the fact that he and i have the surgeries but if you look at the progressive nature of what's going on dr conner said that he's going to have more surgeries so what may have been in two things in addition to that there were more treatments that were given the other thing i think what about dr hamilton now dr hamilton was basically what you call a primary care physician so he would see an periodic lee and dr hamilton primarily focused on the fact that again he would evaluate him and he said that he suffered consistently from headaches was there any indication in the record that mr tanos suffer from migraines you know one and december two thousand and four the treating physician who was at that time a dr bruce a company with the elite a bally chiropractor can sports medicine said that he suffered headaches were one of the things in the mail jay's decision stated that there were no records of headaches and the record in fact contends numerous references to the fact that mr caetano had headaches the a severe limitation it's kind of difficult to say something doesn't exist but if they did it wouldn't contribute and so that was part of the l g a opinion well was that in response to doctor treated with different medications for example  in two thousand and three he was being treated with flexeril invited for pain and that's in the e r t seventy three he and at the time and i guess one of the difficulties is because we've seen this him get progressively worse over time when he appeared for his twenty twelve hearing he indicated to the judge that he was using a pick a spine stimulator because his pain is so severe and they wanted to put in a mor drip but because it would involve more surgery he objected to that so the wanted to know records shows that his condition has been progressively getting worse as opposed to the fact that tenets of that doesn't change in fact the two stephanopoulos is again contained in that the purpose of the change according to the social security administration was to clarify the credibility assessment  the next step which requires if you don't find them lingering and there was no indication that mr caetano has been lingering that there has to be a rejection of the claimant severity symptoms by clear and convincing reasons one of the reasons that was given and the thing that's also supported by s s r sixteen point three peat is activities of daily living i think there's been some misconstru ing of the activities of daily living mr khatami indicated that and one of the things was the fact that he put the dishes in the dishwasher indicated that he does that he also indicated that he spends most of the day sleeping he watches t v and there was some reference to the fact that he filled out a porn that said he could walk two miles or walk a mile he actually said he could walk a half a mile and he would be extremely exhausted and that's set in our two forty given that the other thing that that we're going to address is the fact that again if you don't include his headaches it's very difficult to talk about his daily activities and the pain testimony once the administrative law judge made in our of c determination a residual functional capacity determination and residual functional capacity is what a person can do in spite of their limitations be a ministry of law judge maybe music to function capacity assessment and then states that mr caetano pain symptoms are not credible because they don't match the residual functional capacity there is no case and there's no loss there's that that's how it's done it's our of see it based on the complete record including the pain symptoms the next is the issue with the vocational expert if you've given the fact that the treating doctors were not considered a given the proper weight given the omission of headaches as one of the conditions that mr a ton of stuff and given the fact that the are of c or residual functional capacity did not include pain d by the vocational expert required overhead reaching constant walking standing pushing and pulling one of the other things that the vocational expert did testify if mr this more than four days of work among there would be no job for him if he needed to stop and rest and every ten minutes or half an hour there would be no job for him remote last insured so we're looking at whether the claimant met his burden to establish that he was disabled between his alleged onset date in december two thousand and three and is the last and heard of december thirty first two thousand and sat within that roughly four year period for the claimants allegedly disabling symptoms during that same four year period five separate medical sources pinions indicated that the claimant was capable of performing a range of late work consistent with the administrative law judge particularly dr hamilton and the issue of headaches the there was a discussion that the administrative law judge said there was no evidence of headaches before the date last intruder that's actually not quite correct on page four forty one of the administrative record which is in the algaes decision the elegy said that there is no significant evidence of headaches prior to the date last insured and that's a correct statement the claimant talks about headaches a little bit in august  might be a neurologist to consider the headaches and at the analysis with dr master which is on pages two sixty two sixty one of the administrative record dr master notes of the claimant says he has headache but he's laughing about it while he's talking about the tics he seems fairly euphoric and dr lester said it doesn't look like the headaches are all that severe and that's the last reference that i could find to headaches before the last insured so on that record with that limited evidence of headaches for about he's complaining of them for maybe one month it to treat a particular symptom doesn't mean that you can't be told to disable does it that's not what mess america stands for is it which case and recommendations the doctor had made about his rollins were not the sort of recommendations you'd expect for saying someone was completely disabled and we have the same thing with dr hamilton there's that limited evidence of headaches there is the treatment of only aleve and  hamilton's opinion on that point goes dr hamilton was completing a heady questionnaire the sort of what what the heading on that form was and dr hamilton's remark at the end that he was that the claimant mr connor was disabled because of bath and neck problems is a very cursory treated appropriately and effectively during the relevant period in december two thousand and three when the claimant alleges onset of disability he has some fairly serious if you look at the records lumbar spine problems and that's the time i believe it was that year that the claimants attorney n claimant was taking vitamin flexor all as more progressive pain medication but in january two thousand and four dr conner performed surgery on the claimant's lumbar spine and noted in subsequent progress notes that the claimant was doing better and that he had significant did sort of explain what that involves he didn't just say like duties that's a job or he's standing all day and does enough to have the lifting and after that opinion in august two thousand and four the claimant went for a little over three years without any real treatment for any kind of pain back pain or neck pain or whatever it might be and he returned to dr conner and i think it was september of two thousand and seven so i've been having some napping and some right shoulder pain and oxycontin then performs surgery on the cervical spine in disabled from that hanging on the point of i i believe i know the ala de discuss is i'm not sure off the top of my head if there is a part where the is inconsistent with contemporaneous treatment notes but the l g certainly thousand one hundred review here in that prior l t e decision administrative record page twenty two the l g makes a reference to dr connors july two thousand and eight opinion and says that appears to be based primarily on the subject of statements of the claimant in the algae notes a lack of documentation of of a disabling level before two thousand and seven so i would point to that reference so showing the fail g is considering the contemporaneous treatment notes but certainly the was a consideration of those notes and has a sort of summary of that medical evidence and i point out that dr kind of treatment notes are consistently indicative of improvement with the treatment with the surgeries and one interesting one important thing about the july two thousand and eight opinion that comes after the two thousand and seven surgery is that dr connors notes following that surgery showed that the claimant was doing very well that he had a dramatic improvement significant improvements from that treatment and it was a reasonable finding doctors who are state agency physicians who looked at the laundry chute and all records from december two thousand and three through the end of two thousand and seven and looked at that and considered based on his response to treatment and the objective findings and every examination i record that he could perform the range of light when they're looking at medical source opinions and treating versus examining riva nonexempt exact steps one factor you consider and if if dr conner examine the treat of the claimant and the state agency physicians didn't that's kind of a point maybe even a big point in dr range of light work and then the claimant goes three years without any real treatment for the pain and then when he comes back and says he has other pain dr conner performed surgery and that's successfully relieves a lot of those symptoms so we have on the one side of the scale she resolved it in favor of those five from the relevant period that supported non disability at the light work level and she resolved it against or rejected the opinions from dr connor in two thousand and eight and dr hamilton and i believe two thousand and nine and that's the  algae to make those factual findings the the my friend of the other side also discussed the issue of credibility and i just wanted to bring up very briefly the subject of the activities of daily living that she was referring to the algae in this case didn't make a finding that the claimants activities of daily living minimal that they seem to be reported to be indicated an ability to work the issue here is actually that the algae is looking at inconsistency is considering inconsistent statements and we have testimony from two thousand and nine that the claimant is capable of doing was capable of doing some chores and sitting for up to an hour at a time and then we have testimony in two thousand and twelve that the claimant wasn't doing any chores at all and could only sit for half an hour and well in an ordinary case we might say well of course there's an inconsistency this is three years later maybe what he's doing three years later is different but let's remember we're talking about that for your period from two thousand and three to december two thousand and seven and the issue is a question of what were his abilities during that period so if he says one thing in two thousand and nine about what he was doing back then something else in two thousand and twelve about what he was doing back then the l g a could reasonably say well this later statement is inconsistent so i'm not going to agree i'm not going to accept that for a description of his abilities from that four year period back in two thousand and three to two thousand and seven so that's i mean that so that some of the l j reasonably made that finding made  for two hours at a time so again we're talking about what was he to able to do before two thousand and seven i would submit that what he's saying in two thousand and seven that he can sit for two hours at a time is far more probative than what he's trying to remember two to five years later about how long he c set and i see my time is running shorts while the first of all us there are further questions i would just bomb summarize it this is a case where the claim had successful treatment first impairments during the relevant period the evidence is consistent we ask based on the evidence that has been presented based on the record that the court remains and the case for payment of benefits and the reason for that is we believe that the administrative law judge committed both legal and factual error just on the areas that we pointed out today in addition to that the record is medically developed we're talking about the period from two thousand and seven to two islam one that says credit as true and that seven fifty nine f three nine ninety five at ten sixteen and we believe that supports a finding that we would credit that's true and that would be every man for