years but she was not resettled there to an extent that it can be determined that she had been offered permanent residence or any kind of the citizenship there while she was there she being an ethnic armenian she was subjected to further persecution and her lifestyle was limited in such a way that she did not live a full life such as almost it is not her wonder if those two things are so full of all and let me explain what i mean let's suppose there were unequivocal evidence that she had become a citizen you know documents and so forth and also she suffered persecution or discrimination or ill treatment of some sort that those that would not demonstrate the absolute so firm resettlement aren't demonstrate for resettlement plus persecution in the next country so i have some difficulty with the argument that evidence of mistreatment whatever level it rises to by therefore they were denied employment for that reason that's what she stated and the judge found her credible she was able to find under the table work which was just enough for two of the circumstance she found houses to do laundry  and she did some cleaning but that was despite the government her pressing her and despite the government refusing her any right to work so it was for two to some her part that she could got a living however it wasn't the same kind of ethnic army and whenever she asked the government for any kind of assistance she was denied that assistance and she had that robbery incident and when they complained to the police they were told to leave the country and then when they filed a complaint iraq they were attacked by the cossacks the government i'm sorry the background documentation showed are strongly tied to the government in that area so it can i think easily be said that the cossacks are her testimony is just replete with many instances where she attempted to wing could not get the basic rights for citizenship most notably was the per piece and there were some issues as far as the type of the motivation for that attack was for it most importantly was what happened after the attack in the government's failure to redress their grievances moreover the cossacks attack upon them when they did try to pressure the government to address their grievances  because she was issued a u s s r passport in one thousand nine hundred nine doesn't necessarily mean she was issued something as a second class citizen because russia is not our both the country and it probably used the same passport when he became a russian federation her testimony was that she was not able to find the same type of housing that she would have obtained if she had a purpose but the evidence less she found a yard she housing was in the yard of someone else's home because that's establish that the housing she found was comparable to what she could have found if she had a purpose is there any evidence in the record that that that now the on i can't off the top of my head of yes or to that question but looking indicated she's a russian national on her there's nothing to show her movements were restricted by the government and some i ask you something that i heard went over with opposing counsel as well as assume for the sake of this question that we were to conclude that she was not firmly resettled would you agree that the case with them have to go back to the agency for an analysis of   most importantly your honor when the incident of the robbery did happen the government attempted to to assist the police attempted to assist they had a lineup which petitioner didn't even go through that bears on whether she was treated presumption we contend that redoubtable presumption of from the sun and never was raised other than its does not show that she was granted citizenship or nationality in russia in fact we think it compels otherwise given the fact that the laws are rather they the russian mob sell states and if the person is permanently residing in russia they will be granted citizenship however she contends she was not permanently residing in russia she was treated as though she is permanently is a permanent resident would you agree with that it does not specifically were exactly just that surprise a number of years that one has to physically reside there in order to be considered a citizen under the i'm not sure which level but just cleaning houses and doing laundry for people she seems to expect that she could have done a better job trying is hard and the key here i believe is whether the government did restrict her ability to live her life in russia she was afraid to go and you are in russia she is afraid of her own government she is afraid to speak their systems after her husband was killed she didn't go to the lineup i believe that shows such a severe restriction it cannot be said that she was free to move within the country we don't know she never tried because she was too afraid to do so finally as far as the robbery again i emphasize it's not so much the robbery itself is how the government reacted to addressing her grievances thank you thank you