reliance on this interpretation almost like a reverse chevron deference except referring to the applicaner than the agency. can you walk me through how that can possibly be? mr. heyer: we are not saying -- we were saying this was in fact a change on the factual. i understand. it's a factually driven analysis. >> you are not making any argument these guidelines would interpreted your way? interpreted your way? . heyer: they were interpreted that way. so i do not see the distinction of practicality given the facts here. >> so the only way they could be interpreted is the way you interpreted them? mr. heyer: saying thingsno specific studies are required interpret that to mean no specific studies arered. >> your position is this which is clear and it is all we have to decipher you to win? just to return to appoint the -- a point the was making, do you agree or disagree the fda didn't havey anything. guidance you rely on.tory do you agree fda did not have t supply that? mrr: they didn't have to apply that. y had never spoken and said the deadls september 9 of 2020 have added, that would be a di