and women are a matter i filed this case in january tenth of two thousand and five and three all to include what i think is a very important case that the government was observant enough put in the record and her brief complaint was that decision came out in november of two thousand and four and it's talks about the forced the issue of forced sterilization in this particular case mr lynn is an illiterate father of four he has a dialect that is it's very difficult to translate but we had a translator at the americas hearing in mandarin and they communicated back and forth well enough to present the case to the court where yes did you did she go to the hospital herself or did someone take the well i was working eunice for that you can see the non responsive nature because the questions are you can't speak mandarin second question did she know she was going to have the operation yes ok well that's doesn't mean it's voluntary if she knew she was going to have the operation the third question did she try to run away or anything which she did not run away because she was already given the notice  me it's not clear to me in the record that what was happening after the birth of the son because a lot of things were happening they're trying to register the children for school which they cannot do with their they haven't paid their fines and if the church if they don't have a registration which they didn't have the because of their prior violations of the one child policy so in order to get a refund the registration they have to they have to show up and be made accountable and i think what he was trying to say was that because they had four children and the children are getting a better school age they have to they have to take a different approach they had they had run away from the government to have four children in order to have a son that's needed a resistance and and and so on having no the responsibility of caring for a family and paying a third in paying these fines and paying for fines even to get litigation i mean the tubal ligation even after they're fined for the violation questioned then was very inconsistent with the prior questions at that point the judge is apparently cut off the testimony and so my point was that after  willing to go through the opera's of the operation the sterilization question you're saying that she was willing to go answer as to the sterilization issue at one time my wife ran away but then the government noticed us notify us and asked her to return to go for the operation and why did she not run away the second time well extra children were being fined asked to borrow the money we didn't have the money yes thank you that's that's pretty much is how he responds to the questions and it's resistance and it's punishment for resistance and i don't know how i read i read this if they confiscated his house because he didn't comply with their policies yesterday that's there is evidence to them that they do those things they're caught then it's simply forced by force and you regard they if they know they're noticed i believe that there's no voluntary they can't volunteer after they whether the sterilization of his wife was involuntary as to their other claims and he just addressed this the house or confiscation of the house there was no testimony about that at all during the hearing for the immigration judge and no mention of issue he mentions in his brief for this court so the issue for this court to consider as he has raised is the sterilization of his wife that's really the only basis upon which he is now claiming asylum then says that she had to be willing well again that's why i think the evidence at best is a clever goal but he said wait the you word he uses is the word willing and he never says i mean i think it's important because on what he says he never says she didn't want to go out almost every day as i could find in the ninth circuit there was either physical compulsion or some sort of coerced so i'm trying not to read anything into this but the last answer on page seventy six sounds like they just gave up so the pressure and so why did she not run away the second time after time because of the expert children and we were being  so we went to our brothers and asked them to borrow the money then to ask her to come back to have the operation done but then at the time we didn't have the money so it sounds like they gave up under the pressure well i don't think that that much can be read into that statement but i think what's important in this case is that he never says it would have been very simple to say she did not want to see was not well and you know what he does say is that she was willing and then he says and while it's while her state of mind is important as well he doesn't say it was fine by me but it wasn't fine by her i mean the time i feel is one of the things mainly they had in mind you know that's a serious operation with the risk of injury or even death we would prefer more children but we would prefer to have alternative methods of birth control if that's tubal ligation was involuntary in that context wants no more children which simply does not want the operation well it would depend on the facts of that case it would depend i mean i think it would depend on what exactly happened and whether that would fall within involuntary look at the age of thirty kids that was cited in our brief there the court found that the immigration substantial evidence supported the finding that she may not have wanted to have i think was an abortion and case she may not have wanted it but she chose to have it for reasons that may not have been entirely based at all on