bankruptcy code which was to preserve rights rather than forfeit rights and the supreme court then adopted it for of of the the six circuit equitable factors th that the court should consider all the circumstances all the equitable circumstances including and it was not limited to the danger of prejudice to that or the length of the status of the parent but the supreme court explicitly deleted a suspect or articulated by the six circuit which was whether clients should be penalized for their councils in the state or in the inadvertent by the attorney them that usually would not be excusable neglect but when it's the client you should look at what what's the reason for the delay and here  individualized determination based on you know what's happening during that sixty day period yes and what would be sort of the standard is it the totality that if there's a at if it's a social security case which is supposed to be you know construed favorably for the claimants under the act and there's unusually protective if it was a difference that you were going might be which if it's neglect which means you made a mistake and it's excusable and then you look at the factors of water it would be excusable and i do think mental illness is a i guess i'm a little bit confused how to apply that  because we're talking about a sixty day period and failure to contact an attorney is is sort of something that the party failed to do at any point during that window as opposed to making  conditions bipolar disorder substance abuse disorder whichever it is like how did that how did that particular condition prevent her from contacting you earlier than she did well at inquire into status for a court case or provide her attorney with updated contact information in the early one and a half years is that statement accurate as to the one and a half years no she had she had been in touch with me prior various points i don't believe it was really after her mom and december that was the period  from the agency to inhale j and then to the district court and then to the court of appeal of the not explained to them but this is way above the pay grade of my client to really get what's happening i explained it's going to take a year or two to get a decision and some people call me every other week and say what's new and i say nothing else call you when something happens and i always say call me let me know if you have a change in direction or a change of phone number so it does to happen then the two in there in the period after her mom she didn't get a hold of me the district court  her delay was due to excusable neglect or good cause as of her birth and the only reason alexander's counsel relates to the district court for her delay of at least a year since her civil action began recorded leave from alexander self was that she had moved out of her mother's house last year when our mother died and failed to get her attorney her new address and phone number that's poor explanation was insufficient to prove excusable neglect or good cause moreover alexander did not to the district court such as the supporting declaration or even submitting such a declaration to this court expressly could claiming her mental condition as a reason for her delay notably to she failed to reply to the commissioner's commissioner's detailed opposition circumstances during the at least one year she failed to communicate with her attorney during the pendency of her civil action i believe that concludes about two minutes your honor this is coach part of it burden to prove that she had that excusable neglect or knew because it was the basis for her lack of diligence the district court didn't have much to go on and the pilot had the opportunity to submit a reply to the commissioner conclusory as i stated the only statement in the letter motions provided by appellant regarding alexander's mental state was her own attorney's conjecture that the reason for the delay was due to her mental illness well i think that this is where the case alexander's attorney or to the court got to reggio is really important there is an instance where mental illness  will amount to this too excusable neglect and good cause the commissioner doesn't agrees with amaechi that there are cases where this would be true were going to the illness does rise to that level counsel rather than a statement from alexander herself that the reason for this delay was due to her mental illness and in fact the letter motions suggest that her mental impairment improved and that her o illness or otherwise ok punishment of excusable neglect it's the same language so wouldn't we expect the same standards to apply in the different kinds of extensions your honor under federal civil procedure many cases there after as stated that the for the rule and therefore a is to be strictly enforced is a hard line standard and while there is discretion given to the district court the discretion was within the bounds of that hard consensus or not i don't remember the circumstances what i do know is that rule four and i require a hardline approach to looking at excusable neglect and good cause for  ready ok you said a moment ago that the commissioner agrees that sometimes this would be excusable the clicked is that as a matter of interpretation of the rule or do you think that there is a as some lead and making filing i think it's based on the interpretation of the rule and based on this court and the district court's interpretation of the pioneer factors the district courts have applied and this these factors to claimants that within the security disability context it was the burden on alexander to prove that her mental illness was the reason for her for her failure to information about the circumstances of her mental illness or otherwise from the time of her filing her civil action in december th scene and the time of the of her time time to file the nose the peel in may have suffer half it's different than if claimant is an appellant is represented i'm not sure what that looks like but what i do know is that none of this was provided to the district court when when given the delay was due to money ms lewis it would be a completely different tos i think it would have given the district court more to consider but whether or not that would be sufficient i'm not sure whether that alone would provide enough reason for at least a year not calling her attorney where the records show she's unable advocate for herself she was able to litigate her case at the time she playing now she was so we should the court should see her as having been so ill that she cannot possibly reach out to  a year she was able to act cross that on her own behalf and litigate her her administrative appeal at least through the st l j decision and st haring and she's been able to update the agency with her own but her change of address and i think what's important here is that remounted wouldn't serve a purpose because she's been denied on subsequent claims she had filed in january of twenty teams and of them or of twenty team i think agency records suggest the latter of which she brought pro se to she shown herself to be able to bring these claims to update her information to advocate for herself to find housing for herself and her mother troubled by the government's behavior in this case including from what we've heard today not being able to remember  certain you know your own conduct with respect to this case where there seems to be a double standard one that you think applies to the government and how with those that behave the record that alexander did not inquire into status court case or provide her attorney with updated contact information or and i'm quoting nearly one and a half years where you where are you getting the one and a half years from and you provide any citation to the record for this assertion please help me understand it's based on what the reading of the letter motion submitted appellant counsel stating that he was unable to contact her she stated that she had moved out of her mother's house at least a year prior and she had failed to contact her attorney one would presume tha thousand and nineteen this is a one year gap are you asserting that it ag zander's attorney filed a brief in may two thousand and eighteen without any contact with his   client and i apologize for the misinterpretation of that but at the very least alexander did not show reasonable diligence for at least the year that having the data i had let me let me pursue some of this you say and correct me if i'm wrong that alexander cannot show excusable neglect because he was due diligent and timely in pursuing her ministries in federal court action until  now actually give support to her contention that unique difficult circumstances inhibited her timely filing here and that her failure should be because your honor the burden was on alexander to say as much to prove that the record shows that she was under similar external stressors having been homeless having been in and out of rehab and struggling with drug addiction during the pendency of the administrative action and she was able to politically her claim and remain in contact with her counsel and with the agency in contrast the letter motion to the district court which is all the district court had to go on said that she had moved out of her cult how home after her mother had passed away and that's why she was unable to finally update her attorney at two her whereabouts it was the burden of alexander to crew her mental illness or some x some year and a half later thank you thank you thank you for your argument the quote will reserve decision