domestic violence the same issue that's been in front of the court just this morning leak you say there needs to be two if only one were charged and it was the domestic violence one if there's the only one that was charged and convictions would not disqualify more rendering you know legible correct any is left with the domestic violence correct i guess my question is does that alone need he cannot get cancellation of removal or does the high g or somebody have to go forward from that and say now i'm going to exercise my discretion i think it wasn't that bad air quality and in fact there was no domestic violence because it doesn't comport to the definition of crime of violence you the petitioner in this case is an l p r but he is also a repeat offender he joined a gang at age fifteen and the record shows he has at least seven not two convictions as an adult in two thousand and four he was sentenced to serve one year for illegal possession of a firearm by a person with a prior conviction  a direction i'm sorry the requirement run in the other direction that if and guns would satisfy the the state crime but not the federal crime and the federal category and then it's the government's for him to prove that that it comes within say one thing in that connection yes it does actually say something on the conviction record that the gun was ordered destroyed thank you and reasonable inference could be drawn that it wasn't something valuable i mean in the sense  it's only remove a bell it's only remove abilities and if it was shown according to your argument that there was a conviction for domestic violence it's raising the petitioner has failed adequately to raise it a second to give me a moment well in this case besides what the i j a did this was not affirmed without opinion by the board there was a board decision so really i think the court needs to look to the a decision but it's true he did ask his from guatemala he asked for a number of kinds of relief asylum withholding protection under convention against torture  as well as cancellation and all the forms of relief were denied and specifically when the board second we find the respondent does not warrant any form of discretionary relief they'll appeal to him because of the significant negative equity is attached to his repeated criminal convictions as i said there were seven set up that way there's certain things that can happen so i can preclude really and so like if these things happen then the fact finder cannot ever reach the question of discretion  that's a bar it's a statutory bar that you know if you if you accept if you accept the conviction as a domestic violence conviction then that's the statutory part but now wait a minute i'm sorry just a second i'm wron cases then it would be but the immigration law being it's complex as it is has different sets of bars for lawful permanent residence and non lawful permanent residen ok well i guess i should just say one of the thing in closing i don't think this particular case needs to be remanded to the board but it's possible that some of the other cases involving the california battery  well here if let's just say when when you when you did it initially you weren't let's let's just assume that this court is going to tell you on a categorical if you don't make it on a forty two you are right if that happens that's that's different than when you were there before it went there would be able to try to satisfy on the modified would there be anything that would it's not like it's not it's not like double jeopardy at that time we weren't barred from having a consideration the court consider that form of relief and consider the petitioners equities it's i position that if in fact two forty two and