appeal with the b i and a new i one thirty petition is currently pending ok but that's not in this case that's right or so we don't have a very very long on that argue with what if you go back to your others thank you regarding the transcripts between ninety four ninety eight and basically what happened is that the petitioner is is waiting for the i asked to do his marriage petition which he filed well i believe that i know i don't believe that ira pi's i believe that with the modification of the car the courts have concluded that the car ira modified by the car triggered t long period of time and when it does it isn't precludes him from being able to pull apply for his suspension case and what this shows i think more importantly is the problem with retroactive laws when you make these laws retroactive  credit decided that this process of finding people in eligible retroactively wasn't fair so they put in a provision that allows people to apply for the cancellation of the new elements triggered by ira first certain people and those are people who get file for suspension were found in eligible but have now met the tenure requirement and are now eligible and this is called was provided for in the car so that's a story for my argument if you want to touch on the asylum briefly and that is simply that there was enough evidence presented through through testimony that respondent did suffer and has a credible fear subjective fear and it was reasonable based on the current state department reports regarding the contradictions in the philippines and i do apologize your hono court clearly can't consider those under the law and us eleven o five the courts review is confined to the record in this case in this were not part of the record he also contends that he is  there are specific provisions and in any event if he believes that he is a member that is not appropriate for the sports arena and what he would have to do is go and seek pursu to reopen that's correct the settlement agreement and there are a homeowner actually it actually contemplates this exact situation and it states that there are believe three ways reports relied on by the immigration judge which show that the n p a is just not the force that it was back in i believe one nine hundred seventy six when his father had the first interaction with the n p a that these were unsubstantiated threats that he actually said he he was wealthy enough to protect himself and he didn't about six different propositions for why there isn't substantial evidence in the case and quickly he said that his political opinion is opposite to the n p a well there's absolutely no evidence in the record that the n p a knew his political position he said his father died suspiciously but then there's absolutely no evidence in the record to suggest that his father died as a result of something that the n p a did and similarly he says his brother was stabbed in his neck he was shot he said in addition the n p a was searching for him i didn't find any evidence in the record that the n p a was searching for him and he said that the military wouldn't provide any or the police wouldn't you mentioned that because i think it will redeem my redeem myself a little bit on citing the improper case i did cite as in my brief and it basically was putting forth the idea that i put forth today and that is in