could continue the hearing or it would take the taken off calendar if i had you know about the whole r s when there was you know some some discrepancies i didn't get him in timely because i was waiting for comments from his debate and he was on vacation so that's we had an agreement and i thought the agreement was to give some additional time because she was blind to texas there was that issue however when  on it was her time to speak st the court has made if there was an agreement and i said yes i'm hoping that we have agreed that there will be additional time seen as yet decided that it was going to be thirty days face we would all waiting confirmation hearings with three different amendments there were no objections there was none of the predator's objective but we ended up having to file this after eleven for procedural reasons not because of being a serial file of we were trying to avoid predators hinder the way etc look i could let me think let me just follow up on my question thank you for that ok there was no there was no written in when you talk about the hearing there's hearing number one you say you have a deal the judge gives you a deal maybe not the deal you want is there there's all your argument during that period then they get done so i did not appeal i did not have the the benefit of having a transcript from the herring and initially when i got the motion i mean the order from that hearing as that i don't believe that back and just was not just for even the motion to dismiss which was granted the same day so we weren't even given an opportunity to try and object to that request hearing to consider it so that is to me  court and so those are the really it's i'm due to make sure that she was reaching every wire me after that because there are so many individuals and small businesses filing we all know than the issues raised by the appellant and so far it is an appeal denial of the debtors nd reconsideration motion with respect to the  missal order which as counsel indicated was based on compliance deficiency once the dismissal came about seven months after the bankruptcy filing even though the and five of the four of the five prior filings had been dismissed and therefore unsuccessful but i don't disagree with you on the scope of appeal honor because in order to be a rule fifty nine motion it would have to have been brought the reconsider amount of motion which would have to been brought within the scope of eight thousand and two dollars and one dollar that is within fourteen days no fraud that would support any type of extraordinary relief for that basis the u s trustee believes that the nd reconsideration order can be affirmed now respect to the underlying dismissal order we believe that that's really not timely brought and therefore should not be considered but even if it work consider even if you accept the debtor's argument that she eventually came into compliance that was more than six months after these documents were due to be submitted now  if there were difficulties with respect to comply the debtor always had the opportunity to see comfort from the court file a motion to seek additional projections was such certainly could have and should have been done at the onset of the case for all of those opinions can you remedy that's a question i have as is how do you remedy a ninety day projection where after the ninety day seven is that it would have been without that says you have what is your and i would have an actual i mean can you ever remedy that we certainly would have not relied on it as a deficiency had it been things that if the but the color doesn't require you know there are few areas where the code says i shall as a judge just dismiss if it's not one of those your office recognises that it should have been done but works with people generally if they if they just do it you know we really try to work with dentures this was an extreme situation your honor because it was months and months later and yes counsel did try to keep my office apprised of the developments but it was not moving forward and there were other remedies that there really should have been a court order allowing waiver temporary or permanent waive her requirements that were difficult to  acquire but this was an extreme case and again the debtor has a pending chapter thirteen case and we believe that there is certainly an adequate basis  by the the issues then go to whether or not it should have been imposed and we could have filed again and say for certain she wishes the appropriateness of one hundred and ninety dollars day bad you would have you would agree that that is moot interesting one i pad i haven't had that had people have problems i've never had someone after six months not able to get run i agree but let's assume that's that's a legitimate issue but that wasn't the only at the time the motion was filed the to thank both of you for your good argument and this matter will be under submission