want to d q they want to exercise that right with discretion to the cumulate they have to explain what their decision has to do with the purpose of cumulation if you look on page twenty six of our brief for example we cite a brief that they filed with the i t c at the cia t v in which they acknowledged that the hammering effect is a purpose of cumulation but that they don't consider that as something that they necessarily have to address that is the whole issue here i'm sorry where it's on page twenty six of our brief where we saw you agree that they filed with the court of international trade and that's the whole issue here if when all we ask is that when they exercise this discretion to de cumulate once they found there's going to be an overlap of competition and once they found that all the imports from every country are going to have a discernible adverse impact give us an explanation about why the reasons i  c elmer hawkins is a vietnam veteran who was exposed repeatedly to agent orange he has very nasty ailments he's it's difficult decision made on whether or not his problems are connected with his exposure to agent orange and if the court please our specifics suggest that the v a or the deviate is struggling to come to grips with the use of agent orange what it does to these veterans and they decide they're not going to grant him compensation they're going to let him drop and he will die it's a severe side statement but that's just they not teen years and it indicates to me it's a court police what has happened and examples of things that the court have done i mean i'm sorry that the veterans administration department veterans affairs have done is they have  taken tissue samples and refused to return him after years they had cited studies anonymously and not provided those studies to mr hawkins and made to determine if those studies seventy eight ninety miles an hour they're going face or the state trooper pulls on everybody go sixty five everybody's calm everybody's going to cling to the law when the damage was the dva was refusing to let us know what status they were fusing to provide to us the results of medical examination of tissue samples that came from arm if this court started intervening in the veterans administration processes and telling them they have to act faster on disclaim in and give them more information on that claim wouldn't we in effect be intervening in appropriately in their process when we get dows of people coming here requesting please give them a a jo in my case no my case is first know my case ought to be first how do we as a court judge which one ought to be first and which one ought to have more priority or unless you ar you'd be inappropriate for this court to make to deviate faithfully execute what the lower which is playing these i'm sure they're making every effort to do so i'm also sure that they make whole lot of mistakes like all human institutions but i'm just trying to understand what standard you would give us for intervening in this case or that case but not other cases in it because that's really what you're asking is your room you're to happen it will have many such cases i understand your are and i'm glad present mr hawkins and he's terribly ill and unless the court is standing there with something pending and the v a will do nothing here's an example nother example what that deviate did we had more mandamus pit petition on the record doesn't show that they do nothing it just shows that they're making an is one of my mandamus petitions i filed requesting three or four different remedies in one room but it was for the v a to take tissue samples and go test them sit in the armed forces and d that's my experience and not the pit the clays and putting mountaineers i may have been doing for fifteen years and they're starring in their most recent decision they started this