you make a pretty good case that i assume you presented to the district court the district court didn't find it that way and the district court looked at it and said listen in this case at least at the federal district court level  you know setting aside things that might have happened in the before the administrative agency before the district court the commissioner can basically conceded error and agreed to a rematch right you know right off the bat and so why isn't that alone and nuff me whether we would have decided the case differently why isn't that enough to say that the district court didn't abuse its discretion that's a pretty high standard to suggest that the district court's position is illogical implausible or without support an inference i mean maybe that yes there is evidence going both ways as there always is on the risk of analysis but why isn't the district courts position that the  and all of those back there show how difficult this the waves plane was as well as a substantial risk of loss well then why did the commissioner concede you know without even responding concede to district court agreed with that right correct yeah so i mean to me the compelling issue is i mean you you got you you were awarded thirty three thousand dollars in fees right from the social security administration for proceedings below and that that seems a different analysis there was a lot more work done there there was a walk more factual development and you laid out a really good case why you were entitled to that but as to the federal district court i don't mean what it was how many hours did you put into the federal district court proceeding roughly that would thirty five hours put into the business and your honor this deviate from the fear agreement in a case like this you're always going to be coming up with some i don't want to say arbitrary because i mean hopefully it's not arbitrary if it were i suppose we would review it but you're always going to come up with some different number and so how do you i mean what justification would you give to say well he's you know for twenty one percent i mean but but i'm only going to have fifteen percent i mean would fifteen percent of been regarding the character of breath its invasion and i would say but i think there was an analysis your no one is disputing your representation was good no one's disputing that you didn't try and delay things the only issue here is whether there was a d after you start with the contract but allow you to finish up and then reserve if they did so i would point out your honor if you look at the amount that there's one order it was somewhere south of eight hundred even though your time's up and you can plan for that i would give you more except we've got through adam's number of cases that we have to get through before the end of the day but let me ask you one informational purposes on the one hand the court looks at fees and they must be sufficient to courage representation from the bar and on the other hand they come out of a disability claim it's past due benefits and i think that this reason the court independent check is entitled to broad distress just discretion somethin's correct i agree that the primacy of the contract but again it's the independent check to test it and make sure it's reasonable in light of the fact that someone's benefits are on the line as far as answering your question and then i have judge gould at the court to be clear the commissioner does not take a position as we do not have a direct financial and tourist and and secondarily i think that judge nelson pointed out that the court had good reasoning that is supported so perhaps the reporting was imprecise but i don't think that that is reason to decide in the  role or i mean because crawford if you read for as limited as that and there's some basis to do that it sort of just becomes this procedural hurdle who did the distinction without a difference and so i mean it's really an odd thing to say well look we're going to we're going to get really hung up on where you start with contract you know you've got to look to the contract st but everybody agrees lodestar i think everybody agrees lodestar can be a tool to determine reasonable minds and  so it almost seems as if the district courts are slipping back into lodestar anyway because that tends to be the you know the best way to determine whether there's a reason right that's a great question your honor i agree it's rate is something that is pretty universal and easier to measure and yet the court acknowledged that mistakes up and get a cheap great result for his client it just was very out of proportion to the amount of time and for that comparison of the amount of time council requested the court does mention risk twice one dollar is definitely an error the mistress less than admittedly did not assume risk in accepting representation  however you know almost a rd of counsel's time before that the court was after the commissioner offered to remit so he certainly didn't have great risk in running up one rd of the hours so you  that the court nd reference i'd say is more accurate risk assumed by counsel in the district court proceedings there wasn't much risk and you know about a rd of those hours but overall you you know i i believe the courts reasoning is adequate if it  really was just the and i think one of the cases that mr slipper not relied on in briefing was around the tune of two thousand or more dollars per hour but in that case counsel had achieved a benefit for for an immediate award as judge nelson pointed out this case went back and it was before the administrative agency and there was compensation there too i guess that goes to you know achievement of counsel before the district court here was very good but ah you know that these are not unreasonable i mean is that a no it wasn't enough in the other in if it wasn't enough in the other pieces but it is off i mean it was almost assuming that the client doesn't know a claimant agreed with faith i also don't think the court should necessarily put a ton of stock in what the commissioner does or doesn't believe i think it comes down to the court taking a look at that and here the court dead have been much stronger in the risk of loss much less than i was based with the other point i'd like to made is even though the commissioner agreed i was in title of the birth of the district court had you know this that wayne would not have received over a quarter of a one million dollars he wouldn't have received medicare benefits he would have received ongoing monthly benefits