well begin by hearing argument and moreover says commissioner of social security radiation and i'm having no financial difficulty now from it and if i cannot be granted disability my husband is more you understand at work you know reviewing what the district court how the district court ruled that district courts review and how the social security administration i was i understand that the administrative law judge before whom you had a hearing determined that you wanted sure within the meaning of the social security back like fifteen years so that i would qualify than i have money in the system from i was working for when i was eighteen and they cut all of that out and they just started from a shorter period of time which is when i just was already ill so that's why i've been chilly i had to keep slowing down and cut now i was and that's how i  feel right down my back i'm sorry just so you understand me as more of the issue is not whether you're disabled now we understand that and very sorry for your condition and your illness but no one doubts that you are disabled today the question is whether you became disabled at a time that you were still insured under the social security act and that's the issue in the case and is i understand it i don't think there's any dispute that the cancer was present before that date but there's not been the issue that the social security administration relied on was that there was not evidence that you were physically disabled before the date in two thousand and thirteen when the insurance ran out and that's what the issue is afraid even wouldn't even be able to collect on the my husband by way of my husband's does ability i have no idea frankly because i don't know that issue was even raised in the social security administration and it's something we can look into or ask the your opposing counsel about but if that issue is not really before us our job is to review the decisions that were made in the court the district court and before that in the social security administration if they didn't rule on something if it wasn't presented to them then we have no record and no information about your husband's account for example that as far as i know anyway and we'll see what they have to say about that also they didn't allow him in the courtroom that day which the lord i should have but the security guard at the may please the court my name is susan baird i'm an assistant u s attorney in the southern district of new york i represent the commissioner of social security the commissioner's decision that mauro did not demonstrate disability prior to her date l ensured is supported by substantial evidence and should be affirmed the evidence showed that morrow's date last ensured was september thirtieth two thousand and thirteen and that she was diagnosed and treated for breast cancer beginning in december two thousand and fourteen fifteen minutes fifteen months after her insured status expired she never sought treatment or reported any symptoms related to breast cancer prior to issue was whether ms mora was disabled before that period that's correct your honor because there is evidence in the record at least in the form of opinion testimony by doctors and it certainly seems plausible to me that if her condition was as advanced as it was when it was diagnosed that there was there's a reasonable medical opinion anyway that the cancer was present in her body for a considerable period before that but i take it that's not the question the question is whether whatever illness she had whatever was happening in her body if it did not make her disabled then she would not be eligible for disability benefits your age your honor a claimant who applies for social security benefits has the burden of proving disability which means an inability to perform substantial gainful activity as if their date last insured and that the time they were that's right that's right and i would point out that the evidence that's in the record as to whether or not the cancer existed prior to her date l equivocal her oncologist gave an opinion that it was entirely possible that the cancer exit understand that there's evidence on both sides but as i understand th judge ruled on the issue that's relevant is when she became disabled yes you're right your honor and asked about her husband's count is it the case that disability insurance for example survivorship benefits and retirement benefits are personal and is there any is there any way in which she could be eligible under her husband's account for disability to get an extra benefit for a spouse or dependent children who is who is disabled or just in general just in a spouse or children who are dependent on the wage earner to get dependents benefits that's right it's possible but there are certain rules for that i understand and am i correct also that at least as far as i'm aware from my review of the record there was no application of that sort that is there was no application by mr morrow for benefits for his wife on his account there's no discussion at all in the record of mr that it could be anything more than the possibly i don't even know until i ask you whether there is any possibility of some application that mr morrow could could make is there any way in which  you or someone from the social security administration could at least give them some idea of what applications might be available to them to make you wonder what i'd be happy to do after this argument is over i oh a telephone number of the social security administration that she could call to make that inquiry ok and is there some way that we can make sure that's not the inquiry like when you call the i r s and you're on hold for an hour and a half i mean is there some way you can get like a real number not just the number that you know the general public would be frustrated by well what i'd be happy to do is if this moral has some difficulty in getting through to the right person to remind her of my personal office phone the people come to us with appeals where already there is you know there's no doubt as to how that appeal is going to turn out but sometimes even a parent as in this is not a parent to be  sometimes it's apparent that the person has pushed the wrong button and made the wrong application and there is some other benefit that's rather obviously available i don't suggest that's the case here but you know often  orders and opinions try to make a point at the end ok you don't get this but there is some possibility you could get that if it's properly applied for but that's for another another day and perhaps unfortunately another administrative wrangle to start all over again at the beginning your willingness to be of assistance i have one more suggestion for ms morrow that i can also discuss with her later and that is her  suggestion that she now has financial difficulty that she could apply for s s i which does not have an insured status requirement thank you thank you i was going to ask you about that and you anticipated that so thank you very much  we would ask the court to affirm the district d oncologist mentioned from the beginning that as it went on it would become more and more visible the illness and that in the early stages they don't know at this point because  inflammatory and there's no lump it's cells that are affected and that's why at the time and it didn't seem as b s and that's why i  wouldn't know that i have it and till that day when all the sounds came together and caused the pressure on my brain because that then went to the skull and that's what caused the seizure certainly as judge lynch is indicated already on on his own behalf but we certainly understand your situation now so we hope that there is some possibility for your making further inquiry and perhaps there's something else that can be done so i'll take thank you very much for being here and presenting your argument was baird thank you so much for being here will reserve decision in this case and get you a decision fairly shortly