about his seems to me a lot simpler than the breached and the arguments seem to make i don't see what all of these statements in the record have to do with anything the charge is falsely claiming to be a united states citizen when he answered a particular question correct ok on a form right the second count dropped was making a false statement on the form that that charge whatever it is is no longer there we have one simple count whether he fa claimed to be united states citizen when he answered a particular question that's right what does all the rest of this have to do with the question says are you a united states citizen or a united states national and they said false if he had made it what the government showed was that he checked off the plane i guess medical center i know i know he checked off the box that said he is a citizen or national of the united states now that is a necessary but not sufficient condition to a conviction on this on this charge what that tells the jury the fact that he checked that box is that he claims to be a in the argument well we understand clearly what our burden is when we make a sufficiency of the argument as to patiently of the evidence argument and in this case i think it's incumbent on me to satisfy the court why the remainder of the evidence immigration documents not true of my client there there was not evidence that would that on the basis of which the jury could have done anything but speculate about what he meant when he checked that box that's the substance argument you know i did not parse the record for the kinds of findings that the judge would have made on continuances and i don't know the answer to that question i do know that he had more than several times over trying out by the time he was actually american the answer is no you don't need a jury for that that's a question of law yet we can't tell you how many cases we get where the person comes in we had one last year where they said to him when you married on can get them for perjury counts too would have been perfectly proper count it's not just the questions ambiguous but you can say if you ask them are you either a or b you can't convict them for claiming to be a it's in our national and i think you look at the context of the form and all of the evidence that's what this court that cool times the court said the court must consider the context of the question and the defendant's answer as well as other extrinsic evidence to stand what that means it means are you one of the other if you're either one you say yes well your honor for him not to be convicted under the nine eleven count the only way that would be possible  up i disagree that it's not possible to have this conviction your honor to be the friend and i went to trial made a rule twenty nine motion he just record that there was a jury three words what it is it's not a complicated problem and it doesn't matter what you know he may well not thought that he was a national maybe he did think it's a natural i don't know maybe a lot about being in the astral but that's beginning because the trance counsel kept asking for time to prepare and there were discussions about so resolving the case short of trial i believe there was still adequate time on the speedy trial clo allowed him the opportunity to plead to in the government to be the last serious charge the charge which would have less serious immigration consequences and when the time for sentencing came we did not ask even for time served we agreed  right well anyway it's really not very significant at this point except we're really not picking on