ended your brief which is to say there are two possibilities under which he can claim citizenship one possibility and this came here in the end read the beginning of your theory is that his mother was unmarried at the time  birth correct and if she was unmarried at the time it was worth all he needs to show is one year of residence in the united states by the mother the other possibility is she was married and if that's all he needs to show ten years are we burying the one year a possibility at the end of your brief given that we have a marriage certificate in the record between his mother and father in one nine hundred seventy i believe thirteen years after he answer a question it's very clear and precise they were disregarding it because they didn't have counsel well your honor it isn't entirely clear that it was that clear to him for example it was a compound question to which he answered simply where did he say it's not clear to me he was asked to correct see my problem is i thought i understood your argument i don't know what to do with this because at this point it sounds like even if we consider that grounds for relief we may have to send it back to district court let them sort it out because we don't of this well what is our review here this is not a normal immigration case terminating whether or not the immigration judge has substantial evidence this is this brought under twenty eight u s c twenty two a one which gives you a right to a hearing in district court if there is a trial issue of back and as to whether this person is a u s citizen be some ation discontinuous to know i think or use your argument is the one you're going to focus on that from moment the question that the petitioner answers is with respect to the period after nine hundred forty four now is there any requirement if the question are born out of wedlock and the one year period applies or is there any period during the mother's a life that that one year has to be satisfied or is it sufficient that there is any one year period during her life when she is in the united states i believe that the i believe that the way the statute reads is that it's any period prior to his birth a continuous period there is no girl now if she was going back as a young girl and young girl means anything older than a year and a half she's automatically satisfied and it doesn't matter what she might or might not have after nine testimony as to time a measure of time with which we can subtract the final year and this edition that was made was also a reference on the fact that she has four older sisters they were born in mexico four older sisters right correct and one brother point in the us before she was born but the four sisters were born in mexico during the relevant period this casts doubt not doubt but it makes a factual problem with regard twenty sisters here too the sisters decoration right about time that's all i'm asking in other words if we can't find that there was that one year somewhere and if it has to be continuous these these other things were will period is the appropriate resolution for us to send it to the district court for that determination as a matter of fact that would be if there is an issue material fact our position however is that under the even under the ten year which does not require continuous those facts that may be producing an issue are not relevant to that statute and therefore there is no genuine issued material fact under that under that provision ok i think we understand your position let's hear from the government and we'll give you a chance to i recommend for your evening reading for eleven after eleven zero seven because it says that with respect to a claim of citizenship administrative exhaustion is not required in this way of exhaustion is not required  position on the assumption that the question is appropriately in front of us mr whether or not he has a certain sum either under the ten year period or over the one under the one year period if there is a question of material fact as to whether or not he is in fact a citizen do you agree with your opposing counsel that the next step is for us to sort of to the district court to determine that fact i would not submit that your i would say would go back to the immigration court the board of immigration feels for resolution at that instance then if there's a question of fact still existing after the immigration court and the board in relation appeals resolves the issue then the question goes to the district court for resolution not from a real man directly at this  i think that's your conceptual problem an american citizen doesn't immigrate here for instance of immigrants like coming if this person is an american citizen it's not immigration it's naturalization naturalization as well as immigration not was ten twelve fifteen to be five i would you are because even if it's an immigration fact or nationality fact the question first gets resolved by the resolved in the first instance by immigration courts and the board of immigration bill so i would submit the remedy is not that the question on the one year issue goes directly back to the district court for resolution it goes back to the immigration court and the board of imm resolved the one year if you know i think your argument might be different if you had read our cases on exhaustion well i take the point that with the specter nationality this court would would have ordinary jurisdiction but this question was never raised  want page sixty nine of the administrative record this is now the i g talking the board of immigration appeals remanded this case back to this court because it indicated the court had previously indicated that the respondent had not shown that his parents were american well i know his parents were married i just presume to know the law and the idea is actually required to tell him what criteria he then has to satisfy i think the i j a is on notice right there he's on notice your honor but the question was presented before the  was required which it's not i'm not sure why this isn't sufficient well i would suggest that it wasn't resolved at all it may have been in front of the immigration judge but it wasn't resolved at all although exhaustion doesn't require resolution well the immigration judge is aware but think the court's point on that regard now and i and i understand you're not conceding and i'm not asking you to concede for purposes of this question if the question is appropriately in front of whether or not the one your criterion is the appropriate criterion is there any evidence in the record that suggests that the one year criterion is not programme i do point to the evidence in the record that show marriage certificate between his parents in one nine hundred seventy three he was born in one thousand nine hundred fifty seven and we also have this statement from the i j that his parents weren't married you have anything to tell us that his parents were married i do not there's no evidence in the record that they were and there are some of us the record that they were not so i think from now it's understood that they were unmarried at the time of his birth that's correct that means that the one your criterion applies correct not conceding the point but taking the  baptized in this country before she zero we then have his statement of course he was not alive at this time his statement that she doesn't go back to mexico until she's a young girl now i don't know quite what young girl means but that's not the way you want nearly refer to a child of a year and a half a young girl so would be i don't know twenty years old or older or something now there's that and there's no contradiction of that is that enough evidence to understand it evidence from which we would be required to conclude that she had spent one year here uninterrupted within a statutory period difficult for me to say yes or no that is because i'm not immigration judge or had well it's not my recollection on lie on his own wife that is to say this was his mother when she was a lady and then i younger all question it was not more income thirty years later and who knows what was told between the family and the family stories is going to be the basis for that sure