if supported by clinical and diagnostic techniques and not inconsistent with other substantial evidence and you need clear and convincing rationale to reject an contradicted evidence with reading doctor in this case there was no doctor that will come in that she could do light work no doctor old time she could walk or stand for up for six hours or lift up to twenty pounds can you explain why this was not brought to the attention of the a l j were the district court and was only raised about barry about to consider whether or not to think we can really consider in the st instance that she had the clinical and radiological tests that supported d her reports of when she was treated for it thank you ok thank you very much was contradictory evidence there was an opinion from the consultative examiner dr pull on know who examined miss harrington and determine that she had no physical limitations or no significant physical limitation and this was  bending and then a few mentions of paris final muscle baton but does not at all support d the incredibly restrictive opinions here further that a l j found that doctors develop pinions were inconsistent with the record as a whole to l j consider that he was a primary care physician he did prescribe only conservative care there's no mention of him or her and her to a specialist to consider surgery or even pain management or physical therapy all he did with her scribe her one medication and further more so that i believe the alger related very good reasons for providing little weight to dr chevelle extremely restrictive opinions regarding her in the tank and obesity if i may doctors about never diagnosed obesity but even if he did even in his piece never said that it caused any functional limitation and that's miss harrington burden is to prove that there was a functional limitation there's nothing in the record to show that you still would be just looking at her height weight relative the assessment of her capacity was supported by substantial evidence well i think that under the under the regulations you do have to have a diagnosis of a medically determinable impairment in order to consider whether something is severe impairment but you know i will say that even if the court finds that the a l j should abound that obesity was diagnosed that would be a harmless error because there's nothing in the record showing that there is any terms of her obesity even i limitation and the storm you know again checking off some limitations it's not pro but the score has noted that or checkbox forms such as this one are of limited value and this one here certainly was  and then i'd like to also just touch on the point about re contacting doctors developed by may so an l j has a duty to recontact when there's obvious gaps in a record there was no represented by an attorney and the attorney never followed up with the l j and my opposing counsel came on board when this case was at the keels counsel asked shortly after this report shortly opinion from a psychological examiners one excuse me one psychological exam and her and one state agency examiner and the only other thing i'll know is have substantial evidence requires a rewording of the evidence that's what the supreme court has had owed you look at the evidence for and against i've never heard an argument review the m r i and he certainly didn't say that she could stand there walk for six hours and there's no case that i could see where you have to diagnose o referred to any specialist allergist or anything of that sort right now he didn't and that doesn't mean that she didn't have pain and there was evidence that he did her for physical therapy and the judge did not consider her mental limitations she had moderate limitations and extent to he acknowledged it and yet did not limit her are based on judge so that his opinions were not well supported he could have asked the judge the doctor to explain why but he didn't all right thank you very much you're welcome to have your arguments will take the matter