although it is our position that the court should ho submit documentation to support her contention that she never received but if there is a declaration in its subsequent conduct on top of that it's your position and that alone is enough to require b to reassure a person moves they're not going to receive the notice so the it's a very big program there's thousands and thousands of people so they have an address just left with an e mail that to that address statutory authority now to regular mail so in the old regime we always had certified mail rely on the current that's correct if if your client has to sign any document that sen t your client doesn't sign for where your client says i didn't receive it the government says i mailed it there and we have to hold a hearing to find out who just continue to mail them until finally finally i'm just a little concerned as a very big operation we believe the course should reach the merits of the underlying petition for a review of your stay stay the mandates for a period of perhaps ninety days and require the petitioner mr de moss here to file status report on his application for said she is correct and the outcome of that that this decision actually will not prejudice that affectation this court can five in favor of the government and application can be granted and essentially mr bemis would have a legitimate  reason to stay and states and actually have on the law his side is as a lawful permanent resident at that point that said for purposes of judicial economy this case has been going on for some time the parties have been briefed the record is not going to change any points it's close of course and the government thinks that the court should reach a decision on this case before it and then stay the mandates to wait to see what happens with the petition that is pending before the city of those parties or where there's another  angle of this court that is addressing the notice of june so that case will have priority over this case in terms of the mailing issues so there may be some internal court protocol that may cause some delay in any of them i'm not sure if i call it right i know there's another case that has the same issue on the notice of risk you know the second argument on the merits of  overwrite another panel that is already working on the issue so in other words there may not be a decision for the coming for other reasons while you are actually the case has been consolidates far as i know this does two cases would be the sa debating with what we should do and so there's another factor in this case i don't believe that the government would react to that and with respect to the position for review or arced for it is a legal matter it's a matter of due process assumes certification through the mail process under the new regime as i understand it the board is using regular mail that's correct your honor so do you have any authority to suggest that there is any presumption of that there is a presumption that says that males affected by regular male sex slavery which of course that presumption unlike the certified mail regime the the presumption can be overcome both re and there is the kind of conduct that salta the took into consideration absent the affidavit so under these circumstances what is the regime or what does the government content of the regime as far as the board and conduct inconsistent with having done receive and indeed conduct indicating that the person that actively pursuing this so what more would have to be done in the government's view to rebut the reason why i believe that your honor that the case states he or she or any other responsible person at that home did not receive services that that me ordinarily be enough it doesn't mandate that that's the case it's case of slightly have for the last quite a few months but eventually if you lose on it you will then resurface well it would be up to this court to decide whether or not you would want to remain in it for further evidence your hearing under salt or not and then at that point the board  determine whether or not it should really issue its decision if that was the course decision in this case and of course it's up to the board up to the court hearing to decide what to do with this matter but that stated  on so you know what the record was and everything so just go ahead and remember the board to reassure the decision to start a new statute of limitations going well your honor i think the board would probably most appreciate either the