petitioner was firmly resettled in mexico the judge erred when he failed to grant petitioner asylum in withholding on humanitarian grounds additionally the record does not support the immigration judges determination that country conditions have changed to regulation discusses the different kinds of privilege is or different rights that respondent petitioner has to have in a third country in order to be firmly resettled he doesn't necessarily have to be a in the regulation except for challenge there is a complete absence of any description whatsoever however in this case petitioner rebut it the judge's finding with two pieces of evidence that he that her name was offered the presumption should not obtain what proof would you point to well your honor there is the response as a petitioners testimony where he testified that his children could not go to school in mexico which resettled and as you yourself the state of the asylum example that's a perfect example in this country as i leave in this country cannot vote and doesn't have all of the rights and privileges that i as a u s citizen have however too restrictive on his liberty because that was as you know very i believe implying that those people who curfews they could only come and go at the person who was in charge of that camp wh how it is status in mexico compared to the status of one of the forty million undocumented aliens that are in this c wasn't in those proceedings but certainly if he had been apprehended neither of the forty million people who wash the sheets and hotels and clean the dishes in the restaurants and the letters at the airports and that sort of thing  year's been picked up at the immigration service of mexico at which point he would have been deported because at that time the mexican government was not a signature on the geneva conventions either and i don't believe they had any procedures for granting asylum until much later occasions and interrogated his wife about things like well what kind of food really bring when he left the house implying that he would be meeting the guerrillas that he had this pro guerilla political opinion moreover he was stopped and interrogated by an army lieutenant on one occasion where he was only saved for a vigil at the church the catholic church of over more than one hundred villagers staying there to protect him also being his successor in the leadership of the cooperative was martyred as was the treasure in the co operative by the army so as a cooperative leadership member he was targeted for his imputed political opinion and his particular social group also he was a cat catechist for the catholic church other leaders ship other cooperate have are murdered including his successor just separating out what happened to him individually on account of affairs being in the leadership of cooperative show that the returning guatemalans had been massacred that they were slowing the returns because they felt that they couldn't just or ensure the return of safety that the army was continuing to view people who returned  his rights were being violated he wasn't forced to leave he the choice he made the choice of not participating and the program that the mexican government had set up people were allowed to in a ca established for refugees guatemala he chose not to go there he chose not to go there because he didn't want to be under the rules that mexico has set up for people who are staying at that can he want to be have it became you know the mexican government goes into each individual person and say here we're offering you to be a refugee take this i mean he he made the choice well the services own regulations point to a laundry list of factors one of the longer list was not granted lawful permanent resident status in mexico or its mexican equivalent correct that's correct and it's not required for firm resettlement you know he was not able to to he he didn't have papers to come and go from that refugee camp for twelve years with no authority to work vote go to school or own property and he couldn't leave the country and reenter because of the sales that's correct and how is he different from an undocumented worker in this country because your honor he had the opportunity to get some status in at least to be a participant in the refugee program he chose not zero because he could've legalized his status with  his conditions were so restricted by the government to lead to the conclusion that he did firmly settled that we have we get resettlement cases from time to time and they typically involve someone who's gone to a third country and works there and comes and goes and has certain rights but this guy doesn't sound like that even even your honor if you know although he had he doesn't have government's not sure i can certainly bring that back to the court as one of the cases i don't recall the name the individual received french citizenship i'm not sure if that was a bang or not so that's not that's not the point i'm trying to address you certainly raised persecution his point is that you didn't raise in your briefs before this court well founded fear of future prosecution is because times to the distractions that he felt that he would face in the camps and finally inventing the laotian who had spent twelve years in france argued that his french travel document had expired after he entered the united states so he might not be allowed to return begins on page eight fifty four of the record your honor