and trying to understand the distinction you're trying to make right well i think that it turns on that on the test i think the better of what was concern about seeing specific allegations of air in  require more and we rejected that in rivera the more but the problem for you that i see is that while this veterans court decision cites gibson and doesn't cite rivera it nonetheless only cites gibson for the statement that there's no indication in the march one thousand nine hundred five report that reflected any disagreement with the ninth november and they cite gibson that's actually a correct statement of law that's exactly what rivera says all the veteran has to do is express disagreement and so while gibson does go one and require very specific allegations of what you disagree with the veterans court in this case didn't cite gibson for those specific allegation it cited gibson only for the proposition that the veteran here didn't express any disagreement at all and that is correct lauda rivera that is the test of rivera the veteran has to express disagreement so how did the veteran air in rely out of the veterans court arum alliance on gibson in light of the fact that it was a misreading their opinion but i only read their disagreement i think that the disagreement reflected in both the marks ninety five and the may not to ninety five statements in which the veteran stated that he believe you for the court it is argument regarding the earlier effective date the court should dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction but you you i would think would greatly with my assessment the gibson does have statements in it that require a level an oral statement and then it could end up you know being took a sincere we have a veteran who's is mentally ill who tells me to be a employee i want to appeal why isn't that one of the i simply did not want to rule out some kind of factual circumstance not before us here in the instant there was a report that was actually submitted to the v a correct but what occurred was in determining if the vet  for the veterans of competency a field examiner went to met with his wife twice to see if the wife should be the payee for his pension benefits and in the course of those interviews he made statements indicating that he had  talk about the practical reality here there is no doubt that he suffered from this mental illness all the way back to that the time of his service correct he's been awarded service connection going back to november ninety ninety seven the question is whether his earlier claim that he made and then failed to file a stand of appeal on between final right yes that's what i'm saying is this has he ever had to file that appeal there's no doubt that the day earlier date would would apply right yes a question of how far earlier would go because of the earlier claim that he made that was dismissed that's current law going back to that jurisdictional question however this mr deeds issues under rivera when there's a single issue the veteran each doesn't technically have to be filed it could just be a letter but and i'm filing in the sense of affirmative reach sending it to me all over the phone and and say i want to appeal that he was he was harboring and understanding that an appeal was pending the record reflects that he knew he had filed it claim i think these factual issues though kind of raised the the problem of why there is a formal appeal process in the first place the veteran receives a decision then they file a notice of disagreement and they get a statement of the chase that sets out more facts and law for them to understand why the regional office made the decision and then they have about somebody who's who's able to even understand all the rules and regulations right well i think there's two issues there one is that the law does provide that the claimant himself does not need to file the stand and not the overarching legal question yes i would like to return to your other plan as you know you know reviewing a challenge to a factual determination or a challenge to a lot of regulation as applied the facts is beyond the report to apply any different tests that would conflict with rivera there is no difference of interpretation of the law between mr denson a veteran story the only difference is mr what mr digital east actually should be read from the end of the on the question of whether a verbal statement could ever for it since as the statute says it should be made out in writing the question of whether a verbal statement to never be an appeal  veterans documents liberally or not applying to four corners test are really not raised by the situation and that's the veteran those cases when the board does not look at other evidence or theories that were not raised in a substantial appeal document here  that you know these statements could constitute an appeal but really contravene the appellate system that is set up for that matter and through the acts of congress and regulations that statutes thirty eight u s c seven hundred five a and b and the regulations clearly show that the appeal must be in writing it must come from the veteran himself or someone representing his interest which is obviously to make sure that the veteran does have an intent and consent to appeal furthermore as the has noted the statements do not show any disagreement west but the reach office did or a desire to appeal and trying to figure out what he meant in the statement definitely shows that pitfall of trying to construe documents is an appeal that did not come another person acting as next friend did not require that those people filed a claim i think that the important issue is not necessarily who found the climb but that the document found  it weighed its way into the claims file within the appeal period and given that the board and the v a had a duty to liberally construe all the documents within the claims far then the board for acquired to look at that those don't well know you have a good you need to show that how this is a legal question before us otherwise we can't review the arguments that you've made right i understand your own ok but you know i don't recall the board actually addressing the standard or actually do have i don't recall it