if we go to the end of the story i guess what we're looking for in this case is an opportunity to apply for adjustment of status before the immigration judge an opportunity to apply for a waiver that offense since becoming the united states that if you don't think that's a no no i don't think so because if we look at a case that was decided by this court nearly seventy two years ago and that's the duncan case i am a united states and we've sworn to that application there is no question like that on the application of this is what's assume that's not enough how about the statement in the plea agreement and paragraph two where he says that he submitted a fraudulent birth certificate that wasn't his in the purpose was to obtain a united states passport you don't think that's enough i think that short answer that question that would not be hearing before the i j a question on august twenty five last year did you represent yourself to the united states citizen for the purpose of obtaining a u s passport answer yes your honor question was that representation in fact false answer yes your honor why isn't that enough terribly concerned about what the lawyer said isn't this any part pretty clear unambiguous under oath statement by your client in response to questions from a judicial officer saying that in fact he false question to the to the to the defendant or in this case to respond is this what you did and he says yes that's what i did now has skied for purposes of being charged with having me to fall off the claim to an could have been i was trying to get a passport and i gave them a false birth certificate that he's asked directly point morning did you represent yourself to be a citizen of the united states he says yes and then he asked was that false and he says yes because here i thought the issue i think the issue that we have here is you have a conviction not for him making a fall for him falsely claiming to be a united states citizen council one problem i have i think with the approach around your stand your project saying that the b i really has to take a categorical approach to that conviction and if the statute said an alien in admissible when he has spent convicted of falsely representing himself to be a citizen that would put your argument in a stronger light it seems to me it doesn't say that it says you're inadmis if you have falsely represented so it seems to me it's all open to the immigration judge to explore what the facts were not just went conviction watch and was that opportunity allowed in this case or is what we have is that there was the praetor mission of the application under section two forty five a preter mission of the application or to twelve so it seems that we've had have a go both ways if we are going to have  immigration judge simply as you did yes that's what i did rock all right let's have a hearing and let's see what you get let's have the government go ahead and put on their case and show what exactly it is that you did and if you have a way that you if you want to put up your defense then go ahead and just so that was foreclosed that opportunity was never there in this instance we have a conviction a conviction in a nutshell this is what you did this cases we're going to find that we have these cases and various circuits that submitting the application just admitting the application by itself is not going to be enough for us to be able to find that that was a false claim ok i think we understand you thank you a false birth certificate as proof of these united states citizen we also have the declaration from the department of state officer firming that when he submitted the u s passport response to the question is this a permanent bar it absolutely is he will never ever be able to come to the united states based on that petition or any other petition of any kind he's permanently barred from relief i would simply ask the court to consider the waiver itself i think would require that the judge at least hear the facts that relate to the conduct i don't think that it would be sufficient as we have seen in this case for the judge simply do preterm it all  punishment which you would get if he was convicted on the nine eleven which would have been for making the false claim thank you