record is clear that women want mala are treated are subjugated by men and by the culture in general and i want to point out a couple of very telling st of the the same thing to her it affects your community members were threatening three innocent women with sexual violence because they knew they could get away with it there's a lot about the culture of what i'm all and in and my clients brother and not testifying that in our culture we haven't aren't allowed to do things on their own without permission from their that they separated roberto's violence against my client from the community members violence against my client response when there are two symptoms of the same problem which is here in true relocation finding is irrelevant it's a red herring in this case which there are a lot because an internal relocation finding is irrelevant because there is no the problem is that he and i i agree with you in principle just as human the problem is we the presumption of ordered to somebody who has suffered  you didn't challenge is that's the problem you didn't challenge whether she can relocate and he didn't challenge the finding your client was st accuser based on a protected group at least that's that that is not part of my opening brief you're right you can see that by not by making a part of your your opening brief because that's what the local rules say says the guy from o the argument that she really isn't a protected group because she's in a group of women that are abused now you say that's a circular argument but isn't that really the crux as she is a group is not what he's really of domestic violence in guatemala now what you're not allowed to reformulate your social group on appeal you have to argue the same thing before the immigration judge and the board so already because he didn't separate them out in his argument here he's weighing all of them well it's stance he has yes because but st of all we don't even need to get to social group issues because know when he talks about for instance on his twenty five of this brief that his social group is victims of domestic violence in guatemala that route is exclusively defined by the permissible social group so i'm sorry i'm just having a hard time with your circular argument because if we say that women whose general ilyas mutilated is a social i'm merely pointing out in response to your honor's question that she does every source recourse recourse so i think you know one thing that hasn't been discussed at all  so focused on that particular social issue is the fact that her father's it is really constitutes criminal behavior which is unrelated to protect a grouch similarly with respect to members what we're talking about here is guatemala and not your honor i'm merely explaining why i think the board's decision was legally correct and it was legally correct because there is an independent dispositive finally that there is no nexus between persecution lots of bad things happen to people in different countries as we all are but in order to get salim in the united states you have to show that it's categories that the immigration nationality accepts or and that's what has not been done here and that's why immigration appeals and as attorney general they've been trying to walk back they've been trying to fight against that that holding of gender being an immutable characteristic upon wish a kind of asylum based on social group is firmly grounded