particularly serious crime without analyzing whether she did a danger the community but particularly serious crime standard is meant to strike a balance the government has an obligation under both domestic and international yes so that the idea of an immigration judge should have done is even if they considered other factors like nature of the conviction the circumstances and underlying facts of the crime and then ten it must state why do these factors and individual poses a danger to the community here the immigration and b i gave merely reiterated the facts and circumstances of miss much more but conviction but didn't have any analysis finding that the immigrant will engage in future misconduct after the the i have made a particularly serious crime determination the stack unit that requires an analysis of danger to the community so i own a section two forty one b three states that an immigrant may not be the court of to a country where their life or freedom is and things are unless the attorney general the fact is that the immigrant having been convicted of a final judgment by a particularly serious crime is now this is judge clifton it seems to me that you may not have quite answer the question that was posed because my understanding of our case law is that the legal standard no longer requires the determination is the problem and if if you're not required to come up with a separate finding or determination them then what's the problem here not a requirement for a separate finding a future likely to be categorized as particularly serious and more likely it is and isn't enough though is it we have in fact held but mail fraud and wire fraud is enough to constitute particularly serious crime for a separate statement and you have yet to point is to anything that requires such a separate statement so i don't see did the reversible error proposition unless you can give me more to to the determination that an alien has been convicted of a particularly serious crime the government make an independent determination but the alien represent a future danger to the community about  but let me give it a try as i understand if the if there is a finding of a particular serious crime that sort of like a presumption that the that the person is would be a danger to the community but i guess what you're talking about is an order that there has to be some sort of factual notices that supports that presumption yes that correct the immigration judge and and  individual i understand her case was not so much the individual but it's looking at the nature and circumstances the facts of the particular crime that the being gauge is with those facts to conclude that there is such that that it warrants justifies the presumption that this particular serious crime means that this individual is a danger crime particularly serious factors like the nature of the conviction the underlying facts and circumstances and sentence justify the presumption that a convicted immigrant is a danger to the community and then matter friend had to state the th factor that must be considered our nature the conviction the circumstance of the underlying fact the sentence and quote most importantly whether the fight and circumstances of the crime indicate that an could hypothetically find that a crime that doesn't involve harm to a person like the one here is particularly syria but it still needs that analyze why the circumstances of that crime show that an immigrant is a danger to the community or the re and that the statue uses the word particularly serious crime if the crime doesn't hide any finding of danger to the community but the idea could find that it specially any crime warrants sending an immigrant back to a place where they would happy to answer questions about these other areas of the panel had me what do you say the bounds of your time as you requested for for rebuttal ok we submit if the court had no further question now we submit that the court should revert but the determination regarding particularly serious crime and the man with the instruction to conduct the in out that under the proper legal standard thank you we are from the government  reviewing only whether the proper legal standard was applied pressure contends that the incorrect standard with the part because there was no independent dangerousness determination however as your honor has identified there is well established case factors and implement the tional factors which is the agency was essentially stepping outside of its balance and in this case the agency properly adhered to the standard laid out even within  states to compel her to see she manufactured receipts she calls over four hundred thousand dollars in damages and had a lengthy thirty month sentence imposed there for these factors were enough to presume that th e i can pull it up well where do they conclude that the underlying facts and circumstances and what show the the dangers danger in us that this rephrase that that justifies the presumption that the alien would be a danger to society what how do you respond to counsel's argument that what what our case was talking about is you don't have to make specific i j in the b i don't have to make specific findings that the alien is a result of this crime in the future of specifically point let me ask you this isn't there a distinction in that kind of analysis and some determination some fact some assessment of the factual or the predicate factual record that warrants imposition well in reference to the future argument that's referencing that once the particular crime is found to be particularly serious then the petitioner is found to be a danger to the community in the future however stated that the final factor does not trigger an independent analysis therefore the agency properly applied the standard imposed by this court and do not commit a clear air as its anal without any incidents of harm further there's been no direct contact with the petitioner and her ex boyfriend since two thousand and six so any claims of fear at the hands of her ex boyfriend  regarding the petitioner's argument that the immigration judge not consider the experts declaration i would point the court to this court's precedent in in which there's a presumption that the agency reviews all of the evidence unless there's some sort of material disconnect between the immigration judges observation and conclusion however in this case this isn't the petitioner contends that the experts should indicate that conditions are worsening where the immigration judge concluded that conditions are improving and this is somehow evidence that the immigration judge did not take that or the experts declaration however however on page nine of the immigration judges decision the immigration judge outlined the evidence that's illustrated in the experts point while not explicitly citing to the experts desolation but the immigration judge properly balances the evidence indicating that conditions are worsening and arguing that there must be a separate determination regarding whether the immigrant will be a future danger to the community but instead but the a an immigration judge are required under the skin under case law to examine for instance the risk separate determination of dangerousness it spoke at that time the likelihood of future serious misconduct on the part of the alien in fact the government here reviewing that the surgeon conceded that there was not any finding regarding dangerous judges were required to do was repeat the criminal the criminal act and the conviction records without tying it to some danger to the community that would make the crime particularly serious the government also ignored here that danger to the community is part of the particularly serious crime back you know it's part and baked into the particularly serious crime a great physical abuse because that her gender identity and police in thailand didn't help her and back playing games to the harassment and refused to help her and there's also significant yes that's correct so we extend our thanks for your willingness to help us out on that score so with that the case is submitted and we'll take a short that maybe a three minute recess while we make the connections for the next