of the word credible in the terms of bans all credible evidence probably leave some room or frivolous claims you know i know that you know costco versus ins and supreme court noted that testimonial terms doing is allowing some room or the court to be three men right there what i'm saying is that i'm not sure there's a difference between saying that you have to come up with a substantial credible evidence and saying you have to come up  naturalization or if there has been a legal separation or congress could have written a statute that says if there has been a marriage and subsequent legal separation now i right but i but how do you have a legal illegal separation if there was multiple congress wrote a statute that says legal separation and we agree with the point that that implies as a matter of common sense of proceeding marriage what we say is that once you have shown a legal separation  conclusively established the fact of the proceeding marriage now basically what i'm saying is we should take congress at its were and there are compelling reasons to congress and it's worth the rule that if there's a step a legal separation  you haven't come forward with any proof that she was that she could be last elite married to him and so i thought what that is so that we didn't that the magistrate just doesn't even really reach the question of the effect of the of the separation because what we have is you know these orders from the peruvian court and they're somewhat illegible because they refer to an article in the english translation is is not completed just as  certainly accept the proposition that they did that the written result of that proceeding with the travel authorization but if you look at his affidavit he says two things occurred and he said that repeatedly says one the judge issued the end of my relationship for maria and the children i'm going to give you two minutes to rebut what i think we should hear now from is for children or to parents who legally separate so if those two pathways are going to have different meaning under congress's tent it would be that the st one is out of wedlock if the nd one is a valid marriage  well i think that the position is the very the original marriage was not valid under peruvian law it would it would be sufficient to satisfy the requirement of a legal separation which presupposes a marriage  and in any event that's that's not the case at hand the case at hand i would like to address the argument that the travel authorization somehow establishes a legal separation  if if you look at the document itself it's three lines and it doesn't refer to maria it doesn't refer to the marital status it doesn't refer to a legal separation and almonds in the language relating to the marital status of walter rhea rather all it provides is that it gives permission for walter to travel outside of the united states with his children and i  he said of course the only thing i want to do was record that she had and in the homes of the judge for minors give me permission to come here to the united states he even recognizes that the reason he went to the court and allege that his wife had been or excuse me that maria abandoned him was in order to get permission to travel to the united states and i don't think it's surprising that the proving courts would require proof that the other either abandoned the church that the children or consented him traveling with them before he could travel with them right that's just anyone any parent even on what parents can get permission to travel it's a custody determination over their children that doesn't presuppose a marriage a valid marriage i'll also note in his affidavit walters says the judge declared the end of any relationship between me and the children and maria again that's referring to the family unit as  separated and we're not contesting that he got custody of his children and was given permission to travel to the united states with from the proving courts but his that travel authorization does not amount to a legal separation and any event petitioners really asking the court to engage in layers of speculation that this travel authorization which is simply permission to travel is somehow legal separation and that evidence of a legal and walter were married and that means that maria must have divorced the dolphin and then that's that's a lot of inferences and instead the district court properly looked at the evidence before it the concrete  in ria to me that's that's where i read that is as opposed to the family unit i virtue of him getting custody of the children that doesn't definitively establish that the court was recognizing a legal separation and the court order itself but not stand in the th circuit they didn't decide whether the petitioner needs to come forward with an actual judicial order recognizing the legal separation but in that case did he submitted a order from the court of california using the words of separation by virtue of law right in we don't have anything like that here we have a travel authorization  and i i'd like to turn to what the government submitted of course it was not the government's burden to because this is a case involving a foreign birth the burden shifted to the petitioner to prove his citizenship through and the government does conceive this substantial credible evidence so the burden was on petitioner despite that the government did come forward with evidence of  that's why she did it and material disputed fact and why it is that the experts did not at all address whether had properly incorporated the documents from that specific whereas the its records to rain ach and as the district court found significantly the government submitted the marriage certificate belonging to maria goodall phone from that municipality which means that that certificate was properly  recorded and maintained at that meeting supposedly and transferred to rein ach and had a divorce taken place it would have been noted on the margin of the marriage certificate because that was required of mandated  counsel if if if if maria had and walter were not married and this child was out of and this child was out of wedlock a lot then what would be the path for citizenship for naturalized in order to protect their parental rights of the alien parent and so our selami said that certainly congress acted rationally in carrying out that policy by creating essentially only three exceptions to that general one of them for legal separation one for other children born to mothers out of wedlock and the other with one of the parents is deceased  if if i may return to the purported expert testimony i'd also just like to point out that this suggestion that maria may have divorced scott doll photo through the courts of the peace  rather than through the court there's just simply no evidence of bad there's no sort of just creates a theoretical possibility that that happened but we don't have anything concrete or firm even an affidavit from anyone saying that that occurred so we think that the district court properly considered that contrary evidence so the government maintains that walters affidavit saying that it was his understanding that the marriage and did was not properly raised before the district court the paragraph it's that that statement appears as paragraph three it's never cited in any of the posing papers the actual statement is not quoted in the opposing papers and no arguments are me regarding that statement below before the district court judge and but in any event even if this court does consider we don't think it changes the calculation because it's it's a it's a terse statement and it's my understanding that the marriage and did you don't have any contacts to know how walter knew that the details surrounding how he more well i'm i'm not suggesting i'm not raising hearsay because he didn't say he didn't even tell us where where he got that information he just says that it was his understanding so we're challenging it based on their the personal knowledge  requirement that he hasn't laid out a foundation for his personal knowledge and also know that he doesn't state that maria and good ol photo of force he simply states that the marriage ended which of course has a