please the court i had actually written the court about a month ago suggesting that since mr chandler is going to be released in a few days  it might be better to just move to the decision part january perhaps that was in my judgment i didn't think that it was something that the court would grant the motion for expedited consideration under the circumstances and what  not well for one thing i didn't know until fairly recently that mr chandler was in the hospital i i i had predicted that's where he did end up but i didn't actually know that to be the case i'd say it was overly cautious approach on my part your honor i mean that the consequence i think of this is that it was as a result of the to lay and that's your best answer there that is my answer your are i i i'm very cautious when i when i asked the court to hurry things along my experiences ban that when that happens  so you better have a pretty good explanation back earlier in the year i didn't know that mr chandler was in the house but all it's a mistake on my part that maybe not try to move things along quicker i i did look into it when i st got the when i got the appeal back in the summer time the st thing i did was write to the u s attorney  a serious thought about moving things learn quicker was when i saw the government's brief date again i just didn't i didn't forsee the future in a way maybe i should  so i take it that on friday he will be removed from the united states is that correct and i'm sorry or are you broke up what was your thought i think i take it that on friday he will be really from the united states abused discretion by not appointing counsel to mr chandler and whether the district court made it an error of fact in its assessment of the record and i think neither of those claims has merit  they have to wait thirty days after they make their their request if the b o p doesn't act within thirty days they can come directly to the district court to make their motion so that the expectation know that the reason that was created and again this is a difficult case in the district court was aware of mr hyde's other health problems having sentenced him mr hyde received a sentence that was less than house statutory minimum because  qualified for safety valves but nevertheless has his how doc was not insubstantial you participated in a cross border drug trafficking organization over four years i think there's no basis for finding that in this in this period we have right now before the case becomes let me ask you a different kind of a question about the about the merits of the case what is the significance for purpose of the for purposes of this case of the fact if i understand correctly the doctor o'brien who gave a medical opinion is a is a person who's had his license revoked is that correct records that underlie under o'brien's evaluation were evident from that evaluation and i was merely pointing out that those records were in which mr chairman obviously had to get to mr ryan were never presented and we don't have i don't think it's it by a doctor who is licensed to practice medicine has been revoked is that does that have evidentiary value or it can be treated can it be treated as of late zero evidentiary value or is it of is it of some evidence or evaluate revoked doctor as as zero evidence or as a court compelled to does it constitute this it constitutes credible evidence i would i would know i think that's correct the courts have done that the department justice is not pushback on such rulings we have i think in general i think we've we've gone at least in in my in this district as a reason for that for the district court not to take a look and we if the department justice position is that the exhaustion requirement under the statute is not a jurisdictional bar it's a it's a claims processing rule under these circumstances i'm going to not invoke that that are and consider the claim i don't think that that that that anyone in our district with would really push back against that and i think these these these decisions mainly on their merits exhaustion does have a value though especially in this case it would have given that you created a better record for the defendant and for the judge had to evaluate it  retaining me to do this appeal i was assigned this case from the nd circuit this is a c j appeal i was assigned to pursue mr chandler's appeal as far the court asked about whether mr obama brian's o'brian mr o'brian his opinion has value as the opinion of a lay witness which is it missile under the federal rules of evidence where the opinion would help the court understand  an important issue that's before it so i would suggest and then finally i actually looked into trying to find dr o'brian in the summertime one of my ideas was to prepare declaration admissible form and resubmit it to the judge i couldn't find the guy i i even called there's a professional association listed at the bottom of the report i call them they know who he was they said he was a doctor  but they couldn't tell me where he was a in retrospect maybe i should have checked the prison rolls to make sure that that he wasn't a prisoner but it never occurred to me that he was a prisoner in the system and that's the reports coming from who might like your lot already the question that i asked i was really maybe my question was a little too broad but i was addressing it to statements like like chandler is suffering from dementia severe coronary artery disease uncontrolled diabetes those are those are are issues that a lay would lay witness has no capacity to express opinions on and i was wondering what the law was with respect to a to a doctor who has become a lay witness not for lack of medical training but through a process of revocation of the license and in every part of your honor i would suggest that the federal rules of evidence state that an opinion given by a lay witness where it will be helpful to the court can be admitted well do you think a lay witness has the capacity to i represented mr chandler at the trial level d i was assigned the appeal that's the process that the court goes through they automatically assign trial counsel i'm admitted in the nd circuit i made a arguments here in the nd circuit on our number of different cases so i took the appeal the new assignment last summer came out of the blue i hadn't really been following mr chandler's case at all and i judge treated it like any other assigned and i did what i could do resolve the case i was a successful i felt a brief and retrospect i wish i tried to move things along but that was a mistake on my part for not