is this better much better thank you and it's case of catherine involved too severe impairments one is the breathing problem and one is a mental impairment she was terminated in january ninety seven when they were terminated everybody who had abused and so forth now that this claimant must use she has such a breathing problems that her treating on that most of the day she goes out for a short period and then she uses the pints in her nose now at the first hearing i think it has a question about the tank is there any evidence in the record how often your client use the oxygen tank she uses the auction tank she testified most of the day which would be probably about six hours of or eight hour day and she didn't take it to wear a psychological and that's the first hearing the a l j did find that the reading problem the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was a severe impairment and when the case went back to the excerpts of record under our rules i suppose which you prepare are supposed to contain what we need in order to decide the case and they don't do that oh you want to say that it may be in the administrative records that's very large there's only one of them which is why our rules provide that that in the excerpts that you are responsible for filing you are to give us copies of what we need so that when we are in our in our offices there are three of us we can we can we can see what it is you are lying and we don't give it to us in the excerpt playing it enough no no no you you must understand have you read our court rules and i want to read the rules on appeal of the ninth circuit i guess so well you ought to read them because they have it and just for kicks it may indeed but you know despite that you also are required to file briefs with this court and they're supposed to refer to things and those things are supposed to be found in the excerpt i'm of the court date the printing of all of this so that when you write your brief and you make a statement you cite he answers your record it makes it much more smooth even though in the big world out there the record exists we need to the mental impairment at that time the claimants her father had just passed away i wrote to the judge and asked him to continue with the judge refused to continue with he said he would only to me you know if you breathe in our lives you've got to grieve and if she needed this oxygen tank i think it's quite important now regarding the mental impairment this time and he has voice as she says an angel  could get to a job i tried to bring that out in the evidence before the video and one of the east stated well no reason why she couldn't drag that tank along and do the laundry work well it's not realistic what employer even though this is not usually pried out and workers compensation enough social security changes one wonders how an employer would employ anybody that has oxygen tank like you i have looked and looked and looked for a prescription from dr michael berg and the only thing that i was able to identify was in place for the tank there th by counsel about the ability of her to work despite this rolling tank and both indicated that they were not sure about the hiring practices of employers enable the person to form the worth and considering the fact that she you know in contravention to her her testimony did not use it twenty four hours a day because she didn't use it during her psychological  all day every day so central evidence your honour's where she never said that she has it all day every day but she said she was on it all day at home and then when she was out as as you indicated there is no evidence in the record other than her testimony to indicate how long or often she had to use the tank as i said before we have no evidence that retrieved his interest description and