dispute between the parties that were with us such as mrs dale rosa to obtain service connected death benefits or did i see the record must contain one medical evidence that the veteran suffered from a mental disorder to medical evidence that the mental disorder was related to military service the only thing we've got is dr fullerton right correct at this point the medical evidence that we have never examined mr della rose and all the met miss geller on years after the death of the veteran because they because of the stage of the case the main arguments in this case the main issues presented it is the duty to assist under section fifty one of the three a but you got to meet some kind of a threshold before there is a duty to assist  well actually actually knowing the truth of it if you look no i think that's not exactly what our case law says well let me add since qualifier all right that they that they do to assist does provide that discussed that is really that the standard is a is a low threshold and actually if you look at the legislative history of the cia that there was intentional a bit on the part of congress to eliminate first of all the well grounded claim requirement that had been in existence prior to the p c a and in addition well that's all that's all under a right that's that's all under and if a means what you say it means why would congress need b case related to specific service connected disability compensation points but wouldn't that wouldn't medical exams for disability for compensation plans claims be included under your reading of any i mean two thousand in which basically which we cited page six and seven of our replies that actually said that the exact type of assistance such as obtaining documentary evidence or medical examinations or opinions is not not specified on the section in the lack specificity is not intended to limit the type of assistance required for rendered and the committee also emphasize a little bit later that medical exams are opinions in order for the secretary to fulfil the duty in other situations not mandated by the section und general duty to assist undersell part three which became self so there is so hunger did not create did not intend to limit the do you assist provisions only so that's what's contained but also that that was wh so how can a mean what you say doesn't it in a minimum obviate the need for gee how do we give any meeting if we accept your meaning how   those other specific sections of the cd whatever don't preclude other assistance coming under a correct correct that is right the problem for you though is it goes on to say as the secretary considers appropriate  doesn't that leave it to the decisions the decision making of the secretary to determine the propriety right no it's no if you actually look so if you actually look to the to the legislative well let's start at the language w then that indeed was allowed under the under the law because morton had prohibited that additional assistance that wasn't set forth in the statute and so the b c a really was to remedy was to remedy that i don't see to me the genie what she provides as a as a safety for down the road if additional assistance the secretary used to be acting up is to provide to a claimant it doesn't obviate what to you know what is in the area and actually that other clear legislative intent of a that the secretary will not be permitted to provide such things as a medical examination or opinion it was expressly stated in the in the history and in fact there's nothing in there's nothing in the language of the there's nothing in the language of the statute itself that states that under a medical opinion is not warranted for a forty i can i can i just move on before your type just one quick question on the regulations on the suicide was the issue yes why isn't that enough in this case that the board determine whether there are no there was found that there was a reasonable motive for suicide shown by the evidence that's a factual determination the board found it so notwithstanding whatever section of the duty to assist we're talking about why it isn't absolutely incumbent upon us to affirm this case on that basis there are a few reasons or in the first of all we actually argue that that or this court that the board that the board misinterpreted section three point three zero two in the veterans court actually did not ultimately reach that argument as  of legal argument that the c b c didn't reach to the various courts actually stated that the that actually the provisions of three point three zero two are not applicable because it was not a prior finding of service connection so that  that that statement that that ruling by the veterans court was incorrect as a matter of law that the law does not require a fine prior finding of service connection in order to be in order for the provisions of three requirement no not that i'm saying that there's no prior requirement for service connection if you look at the plain language of judge david says decision actually says that without a prior finding of service connection the provisions of three point three zero two are not extent there is knowledge there is a service connection requirement you're just saying you don't have to come forward anything with regard to service connection and it all documentary evidence then you have to see which says you will actually do more for compensation claimants those documents so you can compensation claims we will we will perform these other tasks related to the document governing  whatever the standard could be and again you say that the standard is no standard it couldn't be lower than the because d is what congress and the v a set would apply for compensation claims so therefore if you're thing that even more lenient the under now here's my question why is there no medical opinion evidence necessary in this case clearly the finding was that mrs dale or the failed to meet her burden of establishing a service connection and even the facts presented to the board that after twenty four years of river service there never been a claim for any evidence of even seeking treatment for any type of mental disability and that the individual had identified his own who papers  prior to his death the rationale for its taking his own life and that the evidence offered in contradiction to this was three laced it was a very sick complained about vietnam service and paid for for the medical person not qualified to issue psychiatric state would never met or evaluated mr du rose and based everything he said in that letter on conversations he had six years after the death and see this is exactly where i'm going you don't believe counseled me that below they've made a holding as a matter of law that because he's already dead you know there's nothing a medical opinion could do here because that would be a regal i disagree terminations it would be of great concern to me clearly there could be someone who is mentally on sound that didn't seek treatment during their this several times or brief the statement and in a different context it's raising their beef about there being no medical evidence at the time of his death but i think that's a key point here for purposes of if you will reviewing the reasonableness of the board's  be met here is the president's ability factor but simply to continue my discussion and in terms of the in service criteria the court this court to distinguish between for example testimony there testimony relating to the broken leg versus cancer ok we would two five required medical evidence you can form you with d s and for support of finding the post medic for a mental disability and so ultimately in this case you need to have some medical evidence establishing a mental disability normally happens is never going to answer the question here it requires rather is judicially reviewable it's something by which this court has to know review to review g covers what if you look at the language of g it allows the secretary to do more allows the secretary to do more than what a exposure presenting evidence of the veterans combat experiences by which show that they were these are stressors of the type that would show p t s d in our case it's clear this drill that it was a was a combat veteran also submitted evidence medical evidence showing that the  and finally in you know state in the evidence of the death by suicide in this case we do have clear clear evidence in our case that mr de rosa indeed and his wife now so for the reasons you know for the