here discussing and which the judge made her decision on into ing so they resolve the staffing issues because this policy delegating gives blanket authority to d o s to accept i went there to petition without approval from u p s therefore if it please the court i'd like to focus on claims relating to the refusal to file stablished procedures to accept the direct i was thirty and the mandated policy that many are required to a i think that it is a few tile action for them to file in the us and i think the confusion stems from why is after all what let me let me say that there's several can there are several issues that the district court did not have correct for example and this reliance on the nicholas declaration that said oh and a case by case basis we can waive this interview is not actually crap the other issue that that that we presented evidence of is in that same is that it's clear that the policy is very clear the policy says if you don't have credible d n a and you can't take d n a from a husband to a wife which is some of our petitions in this case how you can get credible d n a to prove a husband wife relationship so in this particular case they specifically say no d n a you have an interview now for the government to submit a self serving declaration that violates their own published policy it wasn't ok for the court to rely in that particular point not to mention while the policy says they may not schedule an interview that is not the the practice and policy of u s c s every yemeni client who has in fact once this was denied our clients did file i went thirty's and they did about themselves of the end process several of those petitions are pending with d n a and those were filed just prior to the decision and just after because they couldn't wait any longer given the extreme circumstances those petitions are still pending a lot of them where they were credible d n a was submitted at ninety nine dollars nine cents and that d n a was submitted back in two thousand and eighteen we are now sitting here in february of two thousand and twenty and those petitions still haven't been approved and along with my declaration we submitted examples specifically showing that in cases of d n a with the petitioners did not show up to the interview the case was denied and that evidence was submitted in the record to the court and at a minimum under twelve b one if you're going to collect all the outside evidence in this country contradicts fact when you've got the government declaration saying no you don't need to interview in case by case you've got the public policy and you have our evidence at a minimum you need to hold an evidentiary hearing to get to the bottom of what is factually accurate that is answer to that question nd of all what i want to turn to is you said it's not in they want to deny it they have to produce a reasonable explanation and they didn't in this case and if you go to eight c f r two of forty one the code says you must file the form and instructions to the attorney general by which they prescribe this is not discretion then if you go to one of three dollars the forms instructions are hereby incorporated into the regulations requiring it's a mission so the instruction that u produce is now incorporated into the regulations and here's what they put in their instruction instructions where to file please see our website at w w w u s e i asked that gov when you click on that link it sa web sites where to file if you reside outside the united states you may request a file at the us embassy or consulate in certain limited circumstances as described in the us c i s policy if you are a us citizen and you are filing your form for your immediate relative spouse unmarried child under twenty one dollars or parents and then it goes on to say for a list of embassies and consulates priest consult the department of state so one of three to does incorporate this policy and if we look at the appendix page sixty eight and we read what the pouty said and this is another area where i believe the district court misinterpreted the policy because she said that this is discretionary but that is not what the policy side the powers he says if you find someone in your council district who meets these examples you should not may not can you should which which borders on man mandatory you should refer them and it will likely be approved so there's no discretion in that decision is the policy program around the requires both a credible d n a test but also says that even if there is a credible the a it has there may still be circumstances when there is adverse or derogatory information in the file the fact the policy exists if anything to the way simply shows that the policy provides for exemptions and exceptions sometimes are made so so the record is clear i submit that there is no inconsistency between lee has made the argument honor and that goes to the question of does the question the court started with which is the rightness question and with regard to the legal authority whether or not there is any statutory a regulatory obligation on the part of so i would point out to the court with the exception of in the declaration there is not a single shred of evidence that this is not the policy in practice they didn't present one case they didn't present one scenario on the contrary we presented the issue was more with the single mom who did in fact because subsequent to this decision like you said we can't leave people in a war zone we did file i went thirty's and her d n a was submitted and there still has not been a ruling on that to that point i would just like to one of the issues that i have with this yemeni education program and the requirement of coming to the us is that this court declined to accept the western district but many other circuits have decided that there is a property interest in filing for the i one hundred and thirty and i think that that gives the higher scrutiny in that the government needs to follow the procedures that are set out and i also think  the government from setting in a status procedures that prevent us citizens from applying for this property right and the fact that you know they say listen there's an international office that's too full st of all the international offices in italy and they can no more get the yemeni passports into italy than they can the u s nd of all under this new policy they've closed every single u s c s office so there is no international office and what's a yemeni national or u s citizen can go to hold one of these interviews and so i think at a minimum we stated a claim under toby six because of the fact that there is a property right in applying for this island thirty and the government has put regulation in place which prevents some of the u s citizens from applying for this for example a mother whose husband has been murdered and she's got three small children in a foreign country