seventeen that's twenty three all night that the truck he was required the use was leaking fumes into the care but he was told that he wanted to keep his job he had to keep driving the truck he needed the money he could say that he was kind of dumb to do what he did but that was the problem he faced you know those that job or keep driving the truck so we hope for the vast and at the end of nine months or nine days he was diagnosed with brain injury from breathing in carbon against my entry into this case came years before that and when this circuit ruled in grover calculate backwards what the person's earnings were and i had argued at the time and the court agreed with me that there was never a statute in the history of this country that authorized o p m or anyone else calculate backwards in order to determine what the statute describes ouse three highest consecutive years of earnings and consequently after we go over case was decided supplemental appendix page twenty two and me understand this point ari is it your contention that there was good cause here for violating delay in the filing of your appeal to the or more than eighteen months after the expiration date for appealing from the o p m decision because the federal circuit issued to  the fact that they were still every month violating the law and violating the rover decision by paying them the same amount and never recalculate it that appeal to m s p be in feb twenty sevent yet you're saying if it wasn't an appeal from the twenty fifteen o p m decision it was something else that's right really i may have mentioned it but in my appeal to the m s p be it was strictly based on the fact that the law was changed in the grover case and therefore when they kept paying him every single month the same money of they were paying him before hand at the this was the fourth case we filed against the pm and frankly a client braindamaged says to me i think they're waiting for me to die that's kind of the scuffs and four cases each several times they said we'll reconsider and then they reconsider sooner or later months and months later and they affirm what they have said in the first place we ran out of patience in feeling that we should  e difference so i've been afraid to bother with them because my clients and i have several with the same kind of situation they're ill and this isn't the only client to say to me i think they're waiting for me to die so that's why i filed a new case with them as p b seeking based on a violation of what had been decided in grover based on new payments months after and earlier decision and the order predicted that it's an untimely appeal that's exactly what they did judge ten years after he was diagnosed with and i have to go back to o p m with the question and you know anything any adverse decision usually take a year or two before those cases are over and the problem but i understand what you're saying  that cause he mentioned brain damage the pellet did not show or did not bring any evidence to the board to show under the lace a decision that his brain injury prevented him in any way from found a timely appeal before the board on balance attorney mention today that he was found a new case and these types of cases a continue and i think he's trying to say that there was a containment violation however in this type of case there is no such thing as a containment violations the civically when o p m gave a specific direction that the decision was issued on a certain da my question is what is his next course of action if he genuinely believes that his and new to the calculation is currently raw under the law took thirty at this point even though he's made prior claims could he could try not to go to opium say each time he gets a decision is wrong calculation i don't even know if the calculation within ret at this point but that would be a step that he  know that if he any time we go to opium an opium issues a regency the rationing decision opium will give that individual a right to come to the board an appeal that decision to abort within a timely manner in o p m generally emunah could miss something but usually and i haven't seen where opium did not and of is certainly did not in this particular case for me i will say in some feel right this is a file decision you have x number of days