vaccine program were you were in iraq or iran or it was a it was a it was section twelve of the vaccine act or our congress gave special masters in the claims go up the ability to make rules congress gave them the ability and they said you can make rules to govern proceedings in the vaccine program if i vaccine rule amendment thirteen he simply says the decision of the special master on the three requests including a request for in the constitutes a separate decision for purposes eleven eighteen you're suggesting there's nothing in that rule making that distinguishes between cases in which compensation has already been granted which is her new case and your case have the power given to them by congress to make the walls they made a rule thirteen big thirteen b which is entirely consistent with congressional intent with the statute and with the bearer i guess michelle suggesting it doesn't appear to be what about three words as a decision on such petition with respect to whether compensation is to be provided why are you are doing to us that this is exactly such a decision because the work compensation includes attorneys fees and in many cases have held this much precludes the case from ply this case because an interim fee decision in and of itself by definition is not a final decision or a decision on the merits in terms of compensation including the proceedings all the way through your br decision in dealing with it dealing with the fia work i don't think there has been one post of error because i don't think that you your court has had an opportunity to address any type of free decision and i say the special masters final act of issuing a decision that's different from saying a final decision it is this statute appeals from district you provide for i don't find anything in any of the statutes applicable here or even in our cases that uses the term final decision as a prerequisite to going from the special master to the court of federal claims and i didn't find your brief helpful to the extent it misused that term all the way through in quotes as if that term decisions that have been people appeal about specifically the weiss in this frat and case which get into this which talked about the same type of issue the discretion that your court provided in a barrack to a special master toward inner peace is a can of the type of this question the special master has decision under the statute that decision can be taken the court of five will claim within sixty days the thirty days yes especially after thirty days  he is in the aft special master who said as you get twelve thousand to sixty thousand you want to go in that decision why isn't that a decision it's not a decision because it doesn't resolve the fight that issue at hand it resolves only a part of that because it did result the whole issue supposed as william said i'm only giving you twelve thousand and i don't think you're entitle to the right not i'll decide later whether you're entitled to the rest but i don't think you're entitled to the rest will that be available to us that point i think it in there needs to know your honor i think there needs to be a decision on whether a person is entitled to compensation why don't you have relevant to the attorney fees issue i mean like all those district court cases you say that in your brief which are helpful to me because in all those cases of course there has to be a final decision because you only get attorney's fees in those cases if you win if you prevail none of those cases had a statute like we have in the veterans cases where you can get fees whether you prevail or not i beg to differ your honor because i think compensation includes a term attorney's fees under the act when they're defining a composition it so our position is that there has to be a final determination compensation which would include both whether or not to shine doesn't appear here so we've already agreed on that just as a decision on such position with respect to whether compensation is to be provided since the work compensation includes attorney fees why isn't this a decision on the petition with respect to attorneys well it says a decision on a petition and the amount of compensation to be awarded that's what the statute says is as in and in terms of whether or not there's william's decision went right to the heart of the amount of compensation to be award awarded that's exactly what her decision was in a final decision she left the door and go even if her decision was final it still wouldn't be properly before us so which one is  that's correct that's correct she argument perhaps i confused again but in my understanding you did say there has to be a final decision that would in fact have addressed both attorney steve and injury related compensation otherwise it see and go to the court of federal claims that is your interpretation the word compensation since it includes both mean the final decision has to have disposed of both before it can go on and the portion of the decision or the entire decision which addresses the merits of their plane until the judge actually later rules on attorneys be we believe that's a correct reading of the discretion that was provided in a fair and we believe that the relief is a bail seem to think of the whole this is dicta anyway because they eventually ruled that wasn't any award but putting that aside is it the government's position that of really gives no int im the opportunity until there has been a final decision on compensation the special master your honor not to dodge a bullet but that's not the issue for you  down on jurisdiction and we didn't address that issue in this because it really has no input i mean it seems to me that's implicit everything you're arguing in my misreading you well perhaps i'm not being clear that i think that there is a limitation how much the key phrase being at and thus the answer would be no well let me put the question a little bit differently that is that big government position that prior to a decision in compensation your argument then is limited to there is no appeal of an interim for your ward until after compensation award is made correct that is that the essence of your position yes try to find just why why is the motion for you is available so your entire case turns out in whether the term vision in the statue requires a final decision is that the decision that and the appeal requires a final decision on compensation and we believe that the cases that the s c level have interpreted as such i mean just come one quickly in terms of twelve b or c b thirteen b it will thirty b which was discussed earlier the other point in terms of that it's not n the government's position regarding rule thirteen b was it was implemented as a mechanism to take cases where discretion is provided by there is exercise with a special master where interviews are awarded where the parties want to go  forward and have a judgment on that there needs to be some mechanism within the clerk's office and what the courts offices terms are actually setting forth the judgement so these interviews can be paid in the interim and your  one on fees and one on the merits two different decisions i mean the special master could issue them decision number one on the merits decision number two on the fees in fact is not the way it often seems to happen or sometimes provided it well given that it is a decision and not all decisions why don't when we have to feed decision divorced from the merits decision which hasn't come yet why isn't that a decision on such petition with prior that changes a little bit the fear ward is made at the end of all of the hearings but it's a year later that the special master finally works or way through this very complicated case and hands down a ruling on the damages at that point the damages ruling is appealed to the court of what's the status of the you see the problem that the government is proposing we deal with unless we overturn there's a reasonable basis of good faith i want you to be able to make that so you're really and so therefore once you make that decision a decision by the way which is very put just as attorneys whether we have a reasonable basis to between you this case it's important to us that they make this decision you're o to come to a conclusion or resolution as i read of it with interim the or the trial that i went on before the special master where it had nothing to do with later on appeal as to whether it was the approved these were you know a bill to the court of federal claims it's not exactly clear to me how that what exactly was meant in all of that but it is pretty clear to me that the undue hardship but there were that the hardship was minimal