could be answering the wrong question what do we do with the magistrate judges finding out that the notes are unsigned or that are they disappeared to be in different handwriting and questions the two thousand whereas the hearing and the evaluation done by the proper legal standards the problem i'm having is what a lot of this turns therefore on whether these doctors that treated focus staying with the mental illness  issue were treating physicians or not and that's a big swing in this case and i was troubled by some of what i read some of which has been touched on the doctor angle horn was a two thousand devaluation i don't know what he did to test in this case but if you have subsequent treatment reports that say that  materially disagree and show that they claim it has a much worse depression and the degree of severity and the like and those are rejected because on the grounds that these folks were not treating physicians then there's the fallback position was even if they were they their findings aren't supported trying to trace all this through and you know i'm mindful of the standard that you've invoked i'm left with  nagging concern here is that i'm not sure that the proper inference was were drawn in the council of address some of those let me just point out one that popped out to me is that the magistrate judge going through this analysis and i think she was attempting to be careful as well she faltered dr henderson she seemed to find in his report no evidence that there was an ongoing course of treatment by by henderson well i i think that it was sort of a one time deal and yet there's clearly stated within his report a reference to a two thousand event where he where  when was hallucinating and i'm sorry you know that leaves me with a an uneasy feeling here that these doctors the weight of these doctors opinion has been insufficiently credited how can you help me which their entire book so if they're if the if all that's going on here is that it's the plaintiff didn't provide enough records when they certainly did the claimant certainly did provide quite a few records to start say well they were good enough i'm not sure what's the authority in our circuit to say that that defeats the claimants claim that somehow the l j has no obligation to ask for their supplement disagree your honor to say that simply because there was a more recent report that it was more there was more profitable weight attached to that help or the psychological evaluation people deteriorate you don't think they deteriorate over a period of two years his moods have been depressed with little improvement which implies that this is a continuum by his doctor he remains again a continuum word helpless hopeless and worthless his memor two which is the more relevant time and he he makes the psychiatric diagnosis of major depression posttraumatic stress disorder major impairment in several areas where he regard data and if they fail to do so they're out of court in fact willing to credit that was trying to give this person a fair shot why would the l j of what you're saying is true just simply say i'll give you a little recess and i either  the claimants have a lock but what you're saying is well you know after the fact the now we know that given what the l j concluded from this report that they should've brought in more than just the report