the court has jurisdiction here and so even though i think the ninth circuit hasn't necessarily clearly stated that that this that it doesn't deny jurisdiction but you're saying the parties aren't really and so you're hoping that we to the eleventh or whether it stays here requires some analysis in terms of who has jurisdiction you know it was what happened in the eleventh circuit was that does it necessarily does long hair does of long there and then let's say that we say if let's assume that we think ok really it should go to the eleventh circuit but then we can look at it and decide we could keep but if we wanted to but here's my concern why from a judicial perspective i don't really like forum shopping ok just because i think that it disrupts the order of how we do things to shelley and if for example you allow it in a certain and sense but then say someone else doesn't allow it and you both say it's not but we still as a court have to make that determination for let's assume that we all agree on that just for this purpose so assuming venue is not jurisdictional i don't believe i understand your concerns both form so there is no forum shopping here and moreover the government here again says you must be acquired so if a government isn't conceding that it comes states here they're not conceding that issue right buzzwords and i'm saying is that there is no form  bubble everyone would rather be on the ninth circuit for immigration cases right but this was this case is unique in several respects that they kept but if i'm here in the interest of justice if the venue was re more appropriately and the eleventh circuit that we just push those limits and say ok we'll just keep it here because of everything then if you write an opinion then you create a president for you give an arrow in should be transferred to another started and not litigate here whether it should be dismissed or whether it should be transferred that with the interest of justice in alice comes in is not well the question is whether you should demand directed to the and so and and section twelve fifty two b two says the petition for review shall be filed with the court of appeals for the judicial circuit in which the immigration judge completed both sides are in agreement that the ninth circuit has left open whether this statute is whether whether it's a jurisdictional statute or it's just or what i guess what you would  call i think i read that quote from whether whether twelve fifty two b two is purely a venue statute or whether it also affects or subject matter jurisdiction so my understanding is that you don't either circuits have held that we can at least look at it and we can decide was was was we do have subject matter jurisdiction but the ninth circuit has and specifically help that if but then you then and but so we if we chose to write an opinion we could go along with the other circuits and say ok it's if i'm whether it's a purely a venue statute or whether it affects or subject matter jurisdiction if we were consistent with the other circuits we would say it's a venue statute we can look at it and decide but then you would say but if it's if it's a juror a subject matter jurisdiction we've just have to dismiss it that's right  even look at the issue dan but you're in agreement that we can look at it but then what you're saying is venue properly lies in the eleventh circuit but let's see if we agreed with you on that then they're asking for a transfer in the interest of justice which is another procedure right sixteen thirty one year on ok so and then i posited are if we say we can look at it and we say it's a venue statute it doesn't and it doesn't deprive us of subject matter jurisdiction but since the parties are both requesting free man that we could remember it to be i a e a in the b i n g could determine in the first distance whether it belongs in the board considering they applied eleventh circuit case law in large part because in the ministry of appeal in this case petition it was a relying on eleventh circuit case law after proceedings concluded in the eleventh circuit to receive every man order from the ninth circuit if they deny her claim she'll get judicial review of that but at this time we're not arguing for dismissal of her but it makes a difference to the government doesn't whether the remaining goes from the ninth circuit with eleventh circuit for venue purposes  what is the government's position on all these you know venue and transfer stance use is it your position that's a nice circuit must transfer to the ele and all the rest we have a set of facts but also because twelve fifty two b two is control your honor even if it's not jurisdictional it still mandatory and in twelve fifty two b two it says where the immigration judge completed proceedings it doesn't say twelve twenty nine a proceedings the underlying removal proceedings it says removal proceedings which in this case withholding only proceedings are proceedings under section twelve thirty one of the act but ok just just so that we clear at is that  confused with each other here my understanding and judge shima said previously to appellants counsel why doesn't train home i hear you say that that we don't have restriction and that we just dismiss it what i read from trail me here is i still think it's an open question here that we have to say i mean we can either stamp publish or we can determine if we want to go along with the other circuit without even addressing that question well but if if it's of if it's a jurisdictional statute then we have we can't do anything but dismiss it right if it's just total jurisdictional statute we have to dismiss it don't we all know your honor because under six th there is a final order here it was filed within thirty days so it complies with twelve fifty two way into a fifty to be one so as other circuits do what an addition or erroneous even in good faith or no c files in a wrong circuit they'll transfer in the interest of justice ok as the other circuits do is there are specific ninth circuit authority on that point or do we have to make join our sister circuit to get there no you don't i don't think that that answer would have to agree with the other transfer it to the circuit where the and where the government will move to ream in this to the board for the consideration and again it is within the interest of justice to transfer as judge tell him point out even if the petitioners case is not form shopping it could induce forum shopping proceedings were completed in atlanta which is where the petitioner will form we don't have the benefit of what's already happened even though i'm dreaming and allegedly miss beyond a would be able to do other would be able to address other things but she still has a lot of whatever has happened in the case previously right that is correct and eleventh circuit precedent might apply if it's in the eleventh circuit ninth circuit precedent would apply if she's in the ninth circuit  i guess what i'm saying though is have to be i thought there needed to be further evidence for a development that could remanded to the i j a that originally denied relief and do it there as opposed to if it were in the what if if it were if anywhere in the ninth circuit and they felt the record needed to be properly developed it would go to an entirely new judge i believe so your honor but i'm not exactly sure on that and i mix all hope again is given the errors and every single aspect of it and every single requirement for the withholding and cat under the ninth circuit was sol the believe with would be good instruction for the b to examine reexamined those claims under the ninth circuit