recipients tying believe would be the rule if the b r a is going to establish some kind of rule is it that it's enough for the v o a to make a record that they you know they can videotape here's going in the mail ok and then if the petitioner doesn't get the unfair result too to do that certainly the u s mail is known for delivering in all weather and all conditions as we know from commercials and so forth but it's also very i think that when someone is pursuing their people at every level timely filing in the past i think it goes to show that they're doing due diligence to pursue their ideas to the government and vote at all but there is an eight hundred this is poor they'd be a is decision that the record reflects the notice was sent to the attorney the fact that the attorney's name was on the papers the attorney's name and correct  going to get notice through the ordinary course of business that would be an option here the attorney waited eighteen days after he says that he found out he found out he says on february twenty third two the motion is tonight as the record reflects that the respondents decision was correctly mailed to the respondents attorney of record i have no knowledge from that statement with the board looked at the declarations or anything standpoint we set it out so that's enough and if it is that the board's now official position that so long as the standout in regular mail in the internal records at the board and the clerk office show that it was put in the mail it does not make any difference what the petitioner who puts into the sworn affidavits and whatever else they may come up with doesn't make any difference because the board's rule is we put it in the judge business feels positive it was stamped in the clerk's office but somewhere between the stamping which is all that's in the record it's just a statement that looks like even vice a stamp signature that's all that's in the record that i see that doesn't show what happened thereafter whether it fell through the floor or whatever else so there's the board simply say it's enough for our process the board of value writes the record here the statute provides written notice by regular mail not certified as what was there in pale the sign as long as there's a sheet of paper in the file in the board's offices that is enough and if the petitioner doesn't get it they're out of luck there's unless they call the eight hundred  not worth the paper they're printed on we don't believe affidavits under penalty of perjury because you know they don't have anything at stake we don't believe them because there's no object circumstance of anything to suggest that this one may have slipped through the mail that's that's the board's rule i'm not trying to be argumentative i try to understand here because we get as judge kozinski said we get tons of these and i'm sure that the  board does too where there may be a claim of non non receipt so the one rule seems now to be it's enough if we put a piece of paper in somebody at the clerk's office puts a piece of paper in the file and that's that because there's nothing on this record that one can extrapolate anything other than that there's nothing here except some presumption that the board looks at the record but there's nothing that's been articulated by the mean a regulation or a rule or a guidance to say that our rules are that we are now using regular mail we will rely on our own internal records which in this case before us the nicer that pound right now appears to be simply a certification or a statement a letter which shows the correct address it doesn't show the on the open doesn't show any declaration from the author of that letter that he actually caused it to be put in the mail or there's nothing else no evidence cherry track to take it from the statement on that piece of paper as would have occurred under a certified mail regime so now without that regime in place the board is now content to say the risk of non delivery is entirely on the recipient and so long as the board records show it was supposedly addressed to the correct address all risk is on the petitioner so therefore if you have any concerns about nine hundred seat you have this eight hundred number to call you should call it every fourteen days or whatever so that you may be aware in case of not delivering and then people are on notice that that burden is entirely on them so they don't wait as encourages the petitioners to file their briefs using fed ex or d h l d h l and the like and tells them specifically so that they have a record as the sender of that when i deposit it with the delivery service now the board used to have that obligation on its side of the obligation to get notices when you certified mac it's all gone because you say congress  gave that permission so why is the board sort of playing this routine with people i understand it has some concerns about the fissures falsifying statements  city but what i'm just at a loss to understand how the recipient should document that they didn't get it other than by saying we didn't get it means that there's they're totally at risk so shouldn't they know th why isn't the government looking at that so relying on if they why can't they rely on the presumption as well of the post office carries out its form and therefore until it does come in the mail it hasn't i'm sad to see the dilemma i mean how does one know well