part of the substantial evidence standard is that the decision must be logically co parent and c s typical of being meaningfully revered if it is not or data definition of medical opinion is found that fifteen to twenty seven a one and it says statements from acceptable medical sources that reflect judgments about the nature and sabera t of your parents including your symptoms diagnosis prognosis and what you can do despite impairment what i would suggest especially in this particular medical report  is a statement by all symptoms it's also the statement about function notice and i thought i'd say this just a little bit in jest but it's a good  noticed there are no cracks in what we would normally call the patient history section there are no facts that have to do with whether she likes and the reason is that totally not relevant but what is relevant to where the trading specialist is going in this direct order is how leather or not the pain and functional problems follow the the medical understanding of what matches up with the m r i and it's clear that this is not phrased in the form of a restriction as we typically see in these cases when doctors say that you know my my patient is restricted in the following ways x y z that that's not how this medical record reads and it is this statement as far as where it appears and how it appears and how it's phrased in the medical record recitation of what the doctor is receiving as a matter of reporting from the patients or is it as de mint of what he is seeing as a result of his clinical examination of the patients because the clinical measures don't support this because i think the clinical measure would also be the the in point if she had no problems walking sitting or standing and no pain that that corresponded  different way doctor kind of obvious letter it seems came on the th or th of november the hearing as you know was on november th what is in the administrative record that was submitted before the hearing or by way of supplementation that shows ms car had experienced a downturn in her ability to walk to stand aside or in other words what happened in late two thousand and seventeen and s where she helped a family member load a u haul and she was experiencing quite a bit lower back pain after that was there and i fall or injury or anything that caused this flare up that you can point to in the record at the end of seventeen  i'm not positive that there is i would have i would have to go back and look at my statement as a fact i will let you know your honor that i did not do the administration hearing in this particular  e the reason one of the reasons i'm asking that is because in your blue brief of page twenty five you suggest well hey maybe maybe there's a different onset date here maybe not on that date shouldn't be in early sixteen it should be at the end of seventeen and for you to suggest that it many a mistake and it seems to me that maybe you had something in mind that you know she took a bad fall or was somehow hurt and that led to what we see diluted in that letter i believe i've been just drawing in an alternative argument to show that and soon saying there was no downturn whatsoever whatever you're cleaning it isn't the lens yeah i apologize evidence in this case compels a contrary conclusion to that of the administrative law judge in other words is miss carr correct in arguing that dr kind of bodies letter to dr hass leads a reasonable fact finder to only one conclusion that mr karr was disabled the administrative law judge reviewed dr kind of any statement that miss carr was unable to sit stand or walk for any sustained period of time and reasonably found it extreme in light of the normal findings on examination miss carr is unable to demonstrate that no reasonable fact finder could have reached this conclusion in fact as the administrative law judge noted the evidence as a whole supported her residual functional capacity assessment for a reduced range of sedentary work referring to mr for argument just briefly where he got to have hardly mentioned the repair float i'm going to go on that is well miss carr didn't complain about repair flowed she complained about it too she about an inability to sit stand or walk problems with her sleeping and other subjective complaints and these were reiterated by dr and about in the letter supported by treatment notes miss carr's activities of daily living functional reports and state agency opinions the l g s residual functional capacity assessment was supported by substantial evidence mr hinckley you know of anything in the record that i'm not aware of any year on and the only thing that was significant towards the end of the record of course was the surgery which occurred after the after the hearing and before that just shortly before the l g s decision  the difficulty with presuming and a later onset date and i mention this in my brief is that the surgery which was generated seventeen of two thousand and eighteen it occurred less than four months before the  decision accordingly miss carr is unable to establish that she would have even met the threshold twelve month duration requirement and in fact the evidence does show that less than one month after the surgery miss carr demonstrated minimal point tenderness in the lumbosacral region with good and equal strength throughout her lower extremities and she walked with a quote strong unsteady ga also significant judge cutter is that just a few weeks after the surgery miss carr received a thirty pound weight restriction for the following three months and this is actually three times the maximum amount that the l j ultimately found that mr karr could lift and carry so there are big problems with a later onset the objective tests repeatedly demonstrated normal findings  also supportive of the l j s assessment was dr hesus observation just a few months before dr kind of daddy's letter that miss carr had a quote wide very wide variability in her function compared to her written statements and then finally as was alluded to a bit i believe by by judge sykes miss carr's activities of daily living also refuted an inability to sit stand or walk again for any sustained period of time there was evidence that in august of two thousand and seventeen miss carr visited with her son and had played pool with him she actively participated throughout two thousand and seventeen and substance  abuse group therapy as well as individual therapy for anxiety and there is evidence that she got together with family at a restaurant on at least two occasions again this just flies in the face of an inability to sit stand or walk for any sustained period of time mr henslee what about the argument though that you know something's going on here for dr khan a body to put on the table an option of spinal fusion surgery so you know you can join issue with the sentence and i think you know it's very unclear if the sentence is just recording her own description of what she was experiencing or if it reflects a finding but the bottom line is that spinal fusion surgery was one of the options so something's going on right absolutely and they'll be found the back impairment to be a severe impairment and if you take a look at the residual functional capacity it's restrictive i mean the measure of law judge limited h r just to sedentary work never climbing ladders ropes or scaffolds occasionally climbing ramps and stairs balanced you know crouching crawl so it was just an idea really at the heart of this  is the l g a knew that because of the timing of the opinion of easy the surgery that the spinal fusion surgery had went forward right but we don't it a logical question to me is spinal fusion surgery sounds like a big deal not a little the you know can she work after the surgery has anything materially changed and that's a gap is it not in the analysis i don't think it is because the evidence that the l j had in front of her didn't show any increase in limitations so your point she bears the burden throughout if there was such a limitation she should have put it in front of the yes again miss carr has the burden of demonstrating that substantial evidence does not support the algaes decision this has been  repeatedly stated to be more than a scintilla of evidence but less than a preponderance of the evidence has to compel a different conclusion and miss miss carr is relying i would emphasize on not only a single page out of the record but one sentence one sentence in a single page out of nearly a one thousand pages in an evidentiary record to try to refute the  well reasoned analysis she offers no argument that the overall evidence of record supports such an extreme limitation or even any greater limitation than that adopted by the administrate of law judge