the next case on the calendar is ark a group which in some respects are clear but i did just want to be able to highlight in focus a few things because they maybe can get lost in the papers and and the procedural history  of the main problems is that the district court decision didn't take into account i don't think the proper law and facts is that response to this case and that just an offense i case which dealt with the issue but the facts and the law were in opposite to mine in particular there's this issue that the district court for some reason  decision and have the type of input that i that i had wanted to do to my illness and circumstances but my policy as i have included in policy and it's written evidence that a person is disabled an entitled to benefits then the time limits on filing the proof of loss is that a clever person must give us proof of loss within ninety days after the end of the elimination period and then it says if they can't that can be extended another year and if prefers lost his father outside these time limits the claim will be denied the elimination period is the length of time before benefits are paid the person has to be continuously disabled and it starts on the date of disability which for me was in one nine hundred ninety nine and continues for  time limits on proof of loss is just a one time thing you must give proof of loss within ninety days after the end of the elimination of the ninety days it was submitted within ninety days after the end of the elimination period which was six months from my date of disability so it was submitted i don't have a date in front of me but it was the end of one nine hundred ninety nine or the beginning of two thousand your argument is that because of the defined terms in this i don't know because they didn't really seem to address the issue and they seem to from my reading of their decision they seem to just be conflating especially because unum didn't flag to them this  defined language and the elimination period which i think clarifies that that the fact that the action campi prop more than three years after the earlier of the date we received proof of loss or the end of the period it was required to be given would have meant i could never sue after two thousand into the mean time this issue arose in two thousand and four so i think that's for a few reasons one which is the contacts especially for a matter like that need to be construed against the drafter which is you know certainly not me too there should be clarity so that you know if having if i can't see that then how is that any good and three by its very words and common sense it simply does not apply it doesn't say any action brought it any time during a disability payments when the extent of the disability will always have to be brought three years after any time we ever deny to continue paying you it doesn't say that it's a very specifically a time period which is three years from the date you gave or should have gave last which has to be within six months and maybe a year of when you became disabled that's a fixed period it simply doesn't apply down the line and they do also really want to stress how they consistently sort of knowingly put me in this situation where  vulnerable person they had a fiduciary responsibility they just i had consistently supplied them with doctors letters of disability and they misrepresented things to the lower court so that the lower court in their decision included in response to their denial so not only did i send them up until this year for these whole eighteen years my disability statement again that long to lay was not my fault they didn't send the testing to my own neural neuro cognitive tests or so he didn't get a chance to reply to certain basic things like the test results were essentially the same the second for your argument i think your time has expired and i think we understand the thrust of your argument we have your papers and we're going to take the matter under district court decided on the limitations period question and look at it very closely