disability her case was soley on her mental impairment and i have to assert frankly i don't think this case is close as far as whether or not the facts support the standard of whether or not there's  nations paranoia she's been in mental health treatment not only as a child but then transition from the child services through the county into adult services her treating that is step five if we have mental impairments the grids don't apply they direct they are part of the framework but that cannot be exclusively relied on we had a vocational expert at this hearing the judge  you know i don't want to come off as too aggressive you're basically flon of the law by not even asking the vocational expert one single question the attorney and it was on me at the hearing did ask questions a vocational  based on even some moderate impairments in the vocational acts were said there's no jobs that a person can do if i am sitting in that chair at the administrative hearing and i have my factual record with to csar supported the treating doctor support if we have an i q test reviewed partial partial records but even at that point dr garcia in assessing the paragraph the findings of social functioning active actives of daily living concentration persistence and that's that's the point on the staff i grit and i got to just say as you know before i move on if this record is up held as finding that the grid impairments it would put the vocational expert industry out of business there's absolutely no reason avocational expert with this profile to say we can rely on the grids that don't even contemplate mental if not on his estate to impose on you in this way because this is really irrelevant to the kitchen front of it's just a matter of educati that a brings in the grid's also the grids are based on age categories you know fifty and younger is a very high standard fifty to fifty for a little bit lower standard on and on if you're disabled mentally you're disabled mentally whether you're eight to have paid into social security but that you have to be just have a social good number issued to birth i mean when one titles her even to be considered just to clarify your honor there's the two there's the retirement of surviving disability insurance program that doesn't require working and paying into the system that s s i supplemental security income is a purely welfare benefit for disabled poor people you don't have to work or pay a nickel in tax your entire life this is that the safety net that keeps her disabled people living it's hard for boxes on the street i see so she comes in and this purely a title to us i case your honor now there could be potential future benefits for her if she's disabled before he's twenty two under the insurance program if a parent becomes disabled dies  or or become a retires you can piggyback on that earnings record another reason why this is so important to her because if she establishes disability for s s i under age twenty two when mom or dad in the future dies or retires she can get elizabeth fear on behalf of nancy berry hill the acting commissioner of social security obviously the grid issue is the one that my point is bringing forth as the primary issue right here and what the rules are is that any r j may not rely on the grid unless significantly impact the work base this claim it does not have any physical limitations which means under the grades up to medium jobs there are twenty five hundred occupation unskilled work that someone without physical limitations could perform and that's just medium the claimant here is not precluded from higher than medium work so in that situation this court has actually  well obviously we don't believe she's mentally disabled probably disagree with them ok so little so let's get into whether or not she's mentally disabled ok well about my plan is looking at this record in the absolute most negative light possible but that's not what the agency is required to do and that's not what the standard of review requires i would like to direct your honour's to page twenty two in the record where claimants triggers that bench or county where she's treated for most of her life actually said  treatment records which in this case i'm just going to direct your attention to exhibit fourteen af that's mostly in two thousand and thirteen and in that case dr post that has all kinds of mental status examination process that many are thinking that even though she's got a depressed mood sometimes she was her thoughts are normal her judgment are fair and that the records that are specifically from november twenty occupational impairment or moderate at the most and the other one with the activities of daily living no impairment this is the urge or looked at this evidence this is even after dr garcia dr garcia issued his opinion in august two thousand and thirteen this november two thousand and thirteen these are trading source records but we support the l j s findings that the clinic was not moderately limited in those categories so that's what we have in terms of this record showing that yes clearly has problems yes she has had very sad things happen to over her life but she is capable of taking care of her child now if you look at her hearing testimony which is even later in the record that i think that was march twenty fourt goes through december two thousand and twelve and in the beginning claim it has problems but that that exhibit clearly shows improvement with the medication and then you have dr post herself saying on the form symptoms are control past job base the claimant can perform given the great castle i've been looking at the report i believe it's by dr martin and dr martin who i believe examined her in person yes painted pretty rough picture that's true and i believe dr garcia did not examine her in person that's correct there's a strong presumption in the circumstances that dr martin's analysis we should starts saying that she's different people during the course of her she changes who she is based on her mood she says she thinks she's not human knowledge sometimes that's not in the record anywhere else and this is a woman who has a very extensive psychological history that's well documented she's she's never said that before so dr garcia did look at that and looked at more evidence than dr martin did who just on that one day and dr garcia says that's that the symptoms don't make sense and that's not supported by the maybe this will help she can't make it as a functional cessnock that's completely inconsistent with those treatment records that show relatively normal mental status examinations and that's what we have here we have the l j who's the one person charged with looking at  there's an admission of some you know extensive psychological history mental illness the grid do not contemplate these types of mental limitations the question is from judge jones i interpret it as should we be finding her disabled at step five mines a more minimal argument of is there substantial evidence to support the step five finding of you know there's no non exertional impairments to even  impact work functioning therefore the grids apply i do i agree if we look at the treating doctor in a to examine doctors we have a remit for payment of benefits i'm just you know actually the focus of my argument do the grades even apply and this record is so replete with severe mental illness there's no way we can just say the grid contemplate all these factors i would even argue that simple repetitive task that's found by the judge is not contemplated by the group there's