have been the right thing to say like i've considered to be a records but i'm not persuaded that they accurately depict her condition or you know what what  think looking at individually the doctors and what they write is important ok and for example dr being is mysterious longtime treating roger he ordered an m r i that was done on argus seventeenth two thousand and twelve that a right upper brain should nonspecific lot and every opinion is a snapshot because basically the disabled do not have doctors walking around them all day taking notes they see a doctor once a week once a month they're all snapshots you put a bunch of snapshots together and you basically have so on that point also the defendant states cleveland versus colvin to support their position and that's the case where the district court said that the v a s findings were not appropriately they were accurate so they shouldn't be applied to her disability case or sell securities and basically in that case the plaintiff gave what was proven false testimony there was one doctor supporting it and then there was another doctor whose exams and treatment conflicted there's seven doctors at the v a who conducted disability exams and according to the l g again she says that it's based heavily on subjective symptoms but they all the doctors all corroborate one another these various other doctors not one of them says she's not disabled or can work so you'd have to imagine some gross level of medical incompetence or worse  hearing and she said here in council that basically the biggest stumbling walk in the case was various trips to florida and then in this case she highlights five trips or no five missed appointments severe parents so when the judge articulated five times that page thirty eight thirty five thirty eight thirty nine forty one that she missed appointments for physical therapy for non severe impairments somehow that cuts against her credibility that's like saying you you made why she made them and initiatives they were made so mysterious from flora ok she actually was sort of transplanted here from the military around two thousand and six she bought a house and then of course the housing crisis happened so then she was underwater our house her whole family's in florida her brother her mother her sister our father and testifies on page eighty one that if she wasn't under water at her house and worried about foreclosure she be living in florida and this is referenced in the medical say that you know there is somewhere that she said if there's some medical record that says that she went there to take care of her mother and then it could at least back to judge triples question which is the record show that i have a sense of some conflict whether it's she goes down to florida because or family's concerned about her and they want to take care of her versus she goes down to florida hiking she testifies that it's they're going to take care of her i mean lisa story for a long time treating social commissioner gets all about how doctors phrased it is that sometimes doctors are really just trying to describe you know how many hours a day can you be active you know a doctor could say that now it's the doctor made a mistake and said and that means you can't work the question you really just need to excise that and not worry about that last phrase that she sees constantly at these doctors she's got doctors she's got you know the the look like you know needles you know it's not like you break out in a red rash all over your face you know when you're depressed or when you have p t s d or when you have a migraine it's kind of invisible for other people s but i think one of the points is that the findings are still relevant and when the subject of findings aren't substantiated by any objective findings that you are she's got the the m r i showing the spots in the brain that might lead to the migraines mental limitations how can you possibly do this well there were no opinions from her doctors assessing specific function by function limitations so you generally say she has migraines they report some military sexual trauma p t s d neuro vegetative symptoms distorted thinking distorted perception of the sense psycho motor retardation sleeping during the day distorted thinking difficulty prioritizing and not able to change too much i mean these are specific functional things they're talking about why is this a record where there isn't that they're not like work related functional capabilities like price i see objectives is not work related normal for mental status objective findings i mention reports i'm going to read listen to i mean i don't know what you mean objective findings about her mental status let's talk about her concentration her attention and her insight and that period there's also off the opinions of the reviewing psychologists when we did our star trek you never saw our but they did review these records and they are have some expertise affected i don't know how you can make that a qualitative judgment based on reading somebody else's note that said he has trouble with it it's not that the note said it's fine if the notes that it's fine then ok it's fine but the notes are she has trouble with it so how do you get that ranking and how bad the trouble is by reading the file well i think taking the files a whole there are some notes that she has trouble that i think the larger point is that her allegations of such extreme limitations aren't really consistent with the ability to actually complete this program over a longer period of time than other people need is that what the vocational expert said the employers would tolerate giving her twice as long to compete to complete jobs no i don't think there's evidence that she needs twice as long to complete tasks there's plenty of evidence that just which there is some irrelevant mental status like the mental status examination there's usually a series of findings like appearance speech attention concentration insight and judgment and the majority of those examination not for the doctor so you would scold the doctor for writing something like that something is not necessarily i mean that would be relevant evidence they'll just require to consider i want to say the only about that except it that some evidence such as missing in this case i mean you have to feel for these doctors because they're going to be scolded if they write down something that you're looking for and they're going to be criticised for not writing it down if they don't write it down well i think that one point i make is obviously the court only sees the cases that are tonight benefits or other cases g page thirty two she tried to minimize her going back to school but they all just fail to mention is this dairy has a master's degree in human resources she went to get back to school to get a master's degree in teaching she walks out with an associate's degree in human resources the same degree she has a master's enter the same field study rather and she goes through with the program for people with disabilities or she's given more time ok the second thing i want to point out is that there's plenty of errors and you know there's at page eight hundred there's no to the terrorism or serial sevens which is pretty simple you know subtraction and these doctors do not take notes for social security to review them they take notes to try to treat patients so they don't get a residual functional capacity at every look at a patient they treat the patient to try to get the patient that so this decision was not supported by the