being remove all proceedings in december two thousand as he attempted to enter the united states from canada with his permanent resident card his card was confiscated and he was declared inadmissible as an alien not having a proper immigrant visa or entry  document he actually tried to enter two times once on december eighteenth two thousand when his card was taken and again december twenty third when he was placed in proceedings in blaine washington with the issuance of a notice to appear and the key issues in this case are is he in fact in he qualify for a waiver there is a documentary waiver provided under the same act under section two eleven b now the judge in lane washington ruled that he did not qualify for the waiver that he was inadmissible as charged and he had in canada for five years he was physically in canada most of the time yes your honor we came back here to go back to canada yes your honor and the reason that the length of time alone why doesn't that suggest that there is substantial evidence wholly on there was an iranian national who spent much time abroad as well after being noted as a permanent resident in fact his individual trips were longer than mr most threats however mr mafraq didn't spend as much time in the united states as th relatively short period of time your honor his remaining in canada was due to a condition that was beyond his control as a medical reason and when he went back in ninety five just all the rest of his personal belongings and complete his move to the united states medication here but from financial issues well his concern your honor is that he would not be able to get the necessary care in the united states because he did not have any health insurance or access to a doctor in place as he did as a citizen of canada he was able to get all the necessary treatment here as family was willing to support him and your other that's true that they did offer to support him but he felt he would be a burden on them and was he indicated in his own words he was scared to return here because he felt that he didn't have any doctor to go to year where he could provide states it may be available your honor but at a high cost of that insurance he couldn't afford that and didn't have anybody at a doctor here in place but is there any issue here as to the legal standard that the judge applies seem you do have to be resident i believe if you read that letter very closely it does indicate as long as you're at least a citizen as well that's an either or problem if you're a citizen or a resident  correct and i would just like quickly to get back to the same factor your honor even though he did not have property ties or business ties here in the united states he didn't have them in canada either he didn't acquire any property there he was him however under the quota system the priority date for that would be probably about a year and a half to two years away so he could eventually we integrate if necessary but again our argument is that he never abandon his permanent residence in the first place that was granted by the same mother he's the only family member kind of floating out there with no family connections at all in canada all of his family are here citizen mother citizen brother citizen sister in law's extended family all of his ties that he has are here even though they're not to traditional ones as far as property in initially immigrated and then not living here again for the next five and a half years now the time that he came to visit three from time to idaho when i resigned and stayed for two weeks that time can't be considered even living here permanently he lived there as a canadian citizen and connect all of his health benefits were paid for the by the ministry of health and he also was receiving canadian social services there's nothing wrong with any of that i think the court appreciates you made  choice to do that but the thing of it is he cannot be having those sorts of ties to the foreign country of canada and also be residing permanently in here in the united states to hold that would be just a perversion of the law in that in conjunction with the fact that his family said please come to stay with us in arizona we will financially support you we will help you with your medication and yes he rejected that offer from his family for your old man  live up in canada for twenty years and say well i'm still not feeling like i can support myself so i'm not going to come back to the united states just yet twenty years what is that going to be a temporary visit the critical terminology in th not in order to get the british columbia medical care so he thought that it was simply necessary inconsistency between being sufficiently a resident of british columbia to get british columbia medical benefits and also to be a legal permanent resident status is that alone was sufficient to find that he was automatically not a permanent resident of the united states i didn't see that in the image and the judge's decision  you fourteen or fifteen seconds your honor the immigration judge conceded that if a medical reason had been the reason keeping mr pratt in canada that would be enough to still consider him a permanent resident so if you believe that these medical problems that he had which were chronic kept him in canada then you have to overturn the judge's decision because he did not stay there voluntarily or by choice as indicated by opposing counsel he was there from medical reasons and health reasons f