address that i think is crucial to the case is the i one thirty petition that has been filed for the respondent or for pardon me for the petitioner respondent at the court level  case to mediation which would hopefully give time for the u s c i s to process the i one third now certainly this would be the most expeditious way to resolve this case especially if the i want thirty as is approved the court would be able to remand the case and so how long is the i want there to been pending i believe the i want thirty was filed in september your hon so on and one was the marriage i don't i don't recall exactly when the marriage was obviously prior to the to the i want thirty being filed but if the case is referred to mediation then that would hopefully give time for the for the i one third to be processed at the the reason this is particularly important it is because under the previous administration particularly at the court level the government was happy even anxious to grant prosecutorial discretion to allow the court to  administrative fully close the case which the court yet in virtually every instance did except if there was a criminal problem or some other reason that would prohibit that but the court would always allow the i went th the process and the court would give ample extensive time for that to be done that was done other the previous administration under the current administration that no longer exists that the government has a lot of not allowed to offer prosecutorial discretion and i get that  it's not going to help anyway well we can't make the meeting i understand that but this this would certainly be the most economic way for in regard to the issues before the court the board's decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the case there's to cause a back sion in the underlying case the first is the forced abortion the the court that the immigration court and in incidentally the border at at at the b i a level essentially just adopted the immigration court's decision because there was no opposition the government did not file an opposition at the b i level therefore theoretically it could be said that the government has waived its right to let me get down to brass tacks on the abortion claim as far as i can tell the only thing the i j a had to support the adverse credibility finding was the notation on the medical form zero with a line drawn through it just was there anything else nothing else the judge didn't question the testimony the judge didn't question the lack of evidence to the end what the judge did was purely speculation the judge said oh well when when she went to get her i u d removed she should have put the forced abortion on the medical information and when asked about this the petitioner said oh it happened twenty years ago i didn't you know it happened in china i didn't think she said twenty years ago and true she said it happened in china ok it well there was there was an issue about twenty years but she said it happened in china i didn't think that would i only wanted to just get my high you d removed that wasn't relevant to anything that was happening no and it was purely speculation on the part of the ration judge and therefore it's purely speculation on the part of the board at that can't be is there any suggestion that she ruled that the government's reef suggest that she ruled that the government says she list lete listed none well as the sounds as though the government saying that she wrote that that's that's that's impossible that's a medical form yeah and i didn't write the brief but i'm asking two things about the brief if i may honour's to continue so so there's essentially nothing really valid legally or factually to support the judge's finding regarding the forced abortion it was pure speculation on the part of the immigration judge and if you take a look at the second cause of action which was and imputed political opinion based upon the petition nurse arrest beating  and subsequent detention for fifteen days or and then she had to report after that that it was a great deal of persecution involved when she was beaten she was but and that your honour's doesn't make any sense either religion nationality membership in a particular particle group or political opinion was or will be at least one central reason for the persecution and perhaps the most important fact was when when the police arrested her they accused her of being a troublemaker of organizing a riot to go against social order and against the good against the communist 's clearly a political opinion here or i what i should say and imputed political opinion here the police made that clear and they extensively persecuted the petition to say that there's no there's no nexus doesn't make any sense and the i g made no adverse credibility finding with respect to this protest the b a a says some things that suggest adverse credibility finding but what am i supposed to do with the i j a saying well to see him with a b i a writing well that she didn't mention this until the third the third time what am i supposed to do with that i believe that the underlying testimony  very substantially supports the petitioners position am i supposed to conclude that the b a a did not make an adverse credibility finding orde cameo yeah you make an average credibility finding of the  has not well they're radically the be i can say whatever they are whatever they want but but they're but also theoretically they're limited to their record on the case more than that think they undergone what she described as an extremely painful abortion surgery ok she's well first of all it was my translation we don't really know if she used the word surgery but the translator was terrible but a guy had it up in her two thousand and six and two thousand had an abortion and he didn't consider that a surgery as i think most doctors would not he would put zero right i was in regards to the tooth out in the record the medical records shows that she  informed the doctor that she be removed at the i u d had been started twenty years prior in china is the same procedure in which she had undergone the forcible of abortion is highly relevant when it's the same circumstance in which the id had been inserted and c you think that if you asked most american women who had an abortion saying ninety five percent of them when they had surgery they would say they had surgery i believe that most women in the united states when they have a surgery they disclose if somebody has to have surgery and twenty years before you had to portion when you write down you had surgery i believe i would do you think ninety five percent of people what i can't speak to i don't think so i do believe that they would it's uncertain it's unclear well what it asks for is o b history and then there's something i don't understand but i think i and i'm guessing what it means there's looks like a symbol for a female and then some initials that are either m history yes and he and subsequent pregnancy following that would also be relevant in guarding the o b history but we really see what the trouble is we weren't there to know what questions were asked of her we don't know how they were asked we don't know with the degree to which there might have been someone in the room translating or not translating the only thing as we have is this one is zero but with a line drawn through it that's pretty slender stuff your honor she doesn't deny that representation abortion or anything like that but when twenty five to twenty one twenty six at one seventy one through was in court she repeatedly states that she had an abortion surgery when questioned whether her portion was a hold on hold on you're giving me i do see here at the top of one forty six i was ordered then to to go to have an abortion surgery ok and that's the translator who says that yes you know that's a very odd way if you're an we counted normal we have cases like this there's like a dead bang you know i came i worked in this factory in two thousand and two and there are documents showing she still worked there in two thousand and twelve new york well that's pretty tough i'm not seen anything like that here so you could imagine this is a closing argument some asian what what is the while why that have to convince us to say you know what you're right and she clearly with wine what is that why and this is about the brief which i gather you did not write is that correct yes i'm on i want to top of page six of the government's brief which i'll call your briefing where i understand you didn't write a line one that are you read whoever wrote the brief were they reading the same transcript i'm reading did she ever say she had the baby the second baby i think there was a brief indication that what she said was that she was happy because she was able to have the baby and she said he yes she says i have the ability i have the ability she was very precise about it and i thought the same reaction to the brain i mean it was a kept saying that she said things she didn't say she didn't say that going on and on like that i've got another question also on the brief and i understand again you didn't write it you may want to have a conversation with the person who did write it i'm not all that volume of page eighteen and then over the top of page nineteen read you trying to stick up for a colleague here but really she didn't write it that says wrote it could be one thing after receiving information from lee the intake form said this that would be more accurate than say she wrote government and so i'm wondering what the differences between and is there a fundamental difference between this protest which inform was quite similar i e people sitting in front of a government  that he had written two letters to the government and informed them of his belief that their failure to stop corruption at his state owned factory is what led to him and one hundred others being laid off and they also further  failed to pay any of the severance payments that they had promised also that demonstration occurred close in time to the termination for them plame and so to me that kind of renders that he had established nexus between the government officials and his employer and his and his political opinion speech he there after was charged with not only social disruption but with having an anti government anti on you very you you reached the issue of government is making a distinction without a difference i mean the two different the two cases are very very similar to say that there is is imputed political opinion in one situation and is not imputed political situation in the other it is a purely  subjective call but really that it's a distinction without a difference there they're roughly equal she was accused of organizing against social order and being a troublemaker those things are against the government in regard to the forced abortion your honor owens you asked a very candid and specific question what is the lie there is no lie that the whole issue that the judge went on was her who was the judge's own speculation that of what may or may not happened at the doctor's office and what should've happened in the judge's opinion which was purely speculation on the part of the drug that's no valid basis to make a on both of these causes of action should be held in favor of the petitioner and petitioner would request that the government do that or the court would do that ok thank you very much thank you your honor i think most sides for their arguments leave vs sessions now submitted for decision