with two very distinct exceptions the one at issue here is whether there were extraordinary circumstances and under the a political regulations to the statute if a person files within a reasonable time of the expiration of the non status without regard to the pre hearing brief prior counsel filed in the case without regard to state state department regulations and based largely in part on an uncontested investigative report that was prepared for the litigation however he denied it was about petitioners counsel the right to cross examine the preparer of the document and if you will she came here early these are for work a visitor did file for an extension of her b one status which was granted and there is permissible basis to extend the one status in order to do research on an individual's behalf the judge misconstrued the requirements for  have case which came out last month and counsel for the government was kind enough to provide us with supplemental fourteen breaking and in that they've retreated from their earlier position that there is no jurisdiction to review th determination however they're trying to say because i j made a factual determination then really we can't review who decided the case please the ninth circuit court of appeals but i'm not sure which part of  of law or heal the constitutional issue here for years well you're asking us to really evaluate the factual determinations of the i j a about when this person was here how long she had to make the filing when she actually made the finding of those are factual determinations i think now there's two things constitutionally i think there is a problem with the judge's admission without allowing cross examination if you're finished sixth amendment i don't have my brief for just there for a moment you don't have a constitutional issue one how do you morph this factual determination into a question of law because you're on top of these basic foreign affairs manual says you can be issued a b one visa for the following purposes which include conducting individual research council by your lights every factual determination made by any court would be a question of law wouldn't know time barred do you agree with the opposing counsel over there we had jurisdiction to review that as indicated in our twenty a j letter the government does not agree with petitioners arguments for a number of reasons that i will get into  petitioner argues that in his brief that the style i'm claiming should be excused based on the extraordinary circumstance regulation i he makes two arguments in this briefing  doesn't matter if you have to be employed to get a business visa that's what her business visa was contingent on her being sponsored by heart employer when she came to this country so she's not employed under the terms of these are she's not she that her visa was contingent on her being employed that is correct and she there was a dispute as to the facts of whether or not she was still employed mismatch argued that in her brief on page eleven and also during her marriage hearing that although she was like that she was not employed her company allowed her to speak to study english and also allowed her to work nine salary basis to make phone calls were we find that in the record that was based i was in the immigration judges ruling and i was in the well that may be his ruling but where is it on the visa that says you have to be employed you can't be self employed that was in the me i believe that that she was self employed i mean that she said she was doing research on her own injury there was no evidence that used in doing research on our she said she was going to when she had time she was conducting some phone calls but she was that's your story application and her own testimony mr maher stated during her testimony that she did not have that she had received a permit to have one of her  children to have a child within the united states where as and that was what her husband said that she had never received a permit to have this child and that was the main it is important that is the basis for rejection of this claim because the heart of her claim if she goes back should be forced to have an abortion is that the government's position well the government's position is it's a major discrepancy with her claims that she would go back to china and suffer persecution based on the birth of this child in the united states but then in fact she claims that you received a permit from the chinese authorities to have this child but there's a second child born not object to the submission of that document and in fact never asked to cross examine the preparer of that document and it is unfair now in the briefing of this case to say well we should have had an opportunity to cross opportunity to present evidence and to present testimony when in fact his own attorney recommended that he not present evidence thank you very much this is i thank you very much if you're here when you get the last word several different valid reasons for a person to be issued a b one visa including independent research and secondly the judge find as a matter of fact that she wasn't really doing independent research the judge  i don't believe he just said i don't believe her but he didn't have any contrary evidence that she was not in fact doing what she said she did and do you know her to have contrary evidence you have to believe somebody true but i think that the transcript exposes other than the one discrepancy that counsel's pointed out that the judge basically was very speculative i mean if i buy your argument that she doesn't have to be employed she can be doing independent research s he doesn't believe that she's really doing independent research then your goose is cooked isn't it except for the fact that he didn't consider any of the evidence we heard testify you heard her story and he doesn't believe it it brings up some due process concerns i would contend in this record it's very clear that he was other than the one specific inconsistency counsel's point to which i believe did not go to the heart of the claim we had more