are your kids is this morning the st is number eighteen there's thirteen he says milton versus united states mr as i understand your groups now the only thing we're talking about is a claim for disability retirement is that correct that is correct your honor there is mention in the briefs of correction or proceeding two months preceding two months before the decision by the our public health public health decision judge and you know again the motion to dismiss only addressed the nd count in the court's decision only address the nd or course its decision only address the it is a reference to severance pay this is what you're saying and that's a reference to disability benefit disability benefits inclusive on severance pay physical disability discharge with severance pay  of the out the complaint before the before the on the lower court but the actual decision was not attached to the complaint so judge which respect to again mr nelson after he was discharged from the army reserve then started working for the for the public health department at some point he went out on several charge of at that time kept arresting him and creating a hostile work environment relative to him being out and having to come in late based on the fact that he was constantly ill as a result of his service connected disability was inexplicably intertwined with the application because the application talked about his disability is the treatment based on his disability and also talked about him being discriminated based on his disability even though that was not the ultimate relief necessary as it related i think we talked about in our in our final request for relief that he did your honor he there's been several army board decisions the one that mr wilson's council cited as a reconsideration decision from two thousand and sixteen there's been several ones before that he he did make disability claims were i think he didn't establish at the court of federal claims that his close claim for medical for disability with respect to the separation from the army is timely and it is based on the briefs he's focusing on his public health service cor claims not just so the army board of corrections i think he had claimed to be for the army could be for the california national guard board as well good i think the st instance of his claims it goes back to two thousand nine and twenty tons which would make them untimely and my money because this complaint was filed in april twenty seven seen so if they were rejected any time before april of two thousand and eleven and he would be untimely and he has not you don't know we don't know exactly when the st rejection was and also under chambers your honor if he was on you know if he hadn't notice of his disability that argument could be made that he should have brought his  pronounce it along with chambers can be read that there is an exception when a service member has sufficient actual constructive knowledge of his disability and hence of his in title meant a disability retirement pay at the time of discharge and it's quite possible that mr melson had the knowledge here because he had been having medical issues during his time with the army and with the national guard at least the medical issues that he was complaining about with respect to his army separation it's again it's unclear  too whether that's what he's challenging here he appears to and even judging from argument just now it appears they start challenging his separation from the public health service based on medical issues that he experienced during that time two disability claims that he's making one well may be trying to make and it's unclear which one he's still pursuing there is the certainly the the public health service claim and he didn't present that to the that's why the record is so limited because we moved to dismiss he he provided the public health service correction board decision he did not provide his army board of correction decisions to establish that he's t he hasn't established that he was clear here that he had claimed disability or that he had st compton or determine his disability within six years of filing a claim i think paragraph sixty six can be read that there's a board in two thousand and sixteen in january but that is are we consideration board and there's been several reports prior to that so if the st time that he got the st time to the board was prior to april th seen then even his disability claim is barred under chambers