claims is he has a visual impairment and that that was part of the reason that he couldn't get it done right yes but i want to curious on that line how can he claim that if he doesn't you know how can the visual impairment have been a problem when he  was painfully aware that there was no reason to try to read in a courtroom because he felt that was causes premature injury or death even there for mr mr ansal the i'm not a lawyer i will demonstrate that even then when i was able to pull my record out and begin to prepare for post conviction relief attempts of relief i found that i know as i that i could not do it  so that seems that that is the visual i'm sorry that seems like that would be the visual issue yes yes yes all right so then how do we get into that you know how do you expand  yes i have one right didn't stop you from being here today almost judge the judge stopped or says ok he may have had a vision impairment but he never he never established that his vision impairment prohibit him from filing this petition on something would come out of the evidence for hearing i mean obviously the visual impairment has to be the but for if you're going to be successful and that's just saying if if you just put down why we're glad this out entitle him to a hearing limitations was running he makes very clear and it's consistent throughout his state and federal filing that the reason he didn't file any legal papers was because he quote did not dare to read his transcripts while in prison and until actually january two thousand and one is when he began he claims to prepare his legal pleadings and then his eye condition became a factor but prior to that time and during the relevant time period his eye condition or any other medical condition w shown to in fact cause the delay for him he did make an allegation that it was a condition that prevented him from working on his case during the relevant time frame and so they wanted further development of whether and to do that had how does that factor in i don't believe this corresponds to do anything with that in this appeal that wasn't the issue that was granted also if if that is to be considered as part of a general claim for equitable cohen i think that would that would stretch the limits of an exceptional circumstance wrongful conduct with degree that wouldn't be appropriate if there's not some inherent exceptional circumstance for example a medical condition  mental incompetence you problem then you need wrongful conduct from the state and in this case it's clear from his pleadings he had library asked as he had his transcripts in his cell the fact that mr install himself chose not to work on his case because of his concerns of peers whether legitimate or not for his particular circumstance that that would open the floodgates to claims that people i mean whether you're a child molester or not someone can say i was  particularly race and i was afraid to look at transcripts given my cell me or something of that nature and that doesn't become anything extraordinary at that point it becomes a problem inherent in a prison population for sure and given different crimes but i don't think it rises to the level of an exceptional circumstance to tolo when your limitations period i would also like the limitations period of one year i think builds in an entire year for various circumstances to incur that might delay or hamper or impede filing federal petitions whether it be you only have a limited ability to recruit a reasonable library so it takes you longer but the i think congress has made a decision that one year's reasonable time to cover most ordinary circumstances and they also recognize that in maids are for various reasons simply not going to make it but we have to have efficiency and have to