suresh hold issue in this case that she was a child when her mother was abuse continuously from the time that she was involved with her stepfather and that it ultimately ended with the mother being murdered by her stepfather so that's that's a threshold issue their court i j didn't find that she was in fact  that further so i know that the court you requested that we look at a b one and maybe two in terms of the standard question on that but i don't think it was fully developed in the record i must say that she was pro saying she's barely eighteen years old and she's in detention and you know that the judge in that case barely you know brushed the surface of what happened to her as a child in that situation or the other children as a matter of fact i mean i know that she came across the border with her younger sibling but government to control private actors but here you have so even if not agree with you but suppose we agreed that eighty one changed and willing and able standard immediate more stringent apprehended at some risk to agents involved her stepfather and prosecuted so it doesn't seem that they were unwilling or unable to do anything to try to protect her so even if eighty one dollars created a more strings a standard that is more stringent they apprehended him in prosecuting him that that's not entirely helpless or completely help or unable or any definition i think and not a willing or condoning or acquiescing or any definition you want to use they didn't they just didn't do what they did they took steps to protect her so even if i the legal argument were if you were correct how can she went under these facts well for one thing immigration court didn't find that she met the criteria for past persecution so where prevail at this point it's one thing to say that the jailing him after the murder clearly didn't protect the mother but do we have any evidence in the record that the mother tried to get help from authorities and and that was ineffective so you know explaining that that's why she was ultimately murdered with the daughter testifying that she thinks her mother but didn't have been able to get help is there is there anything else well there is no i think that's part of the problem is that the record is pretty  that and the judge didn't ask any more probing questions i mean this young woman was a so she didn't have the opportunity to really expand on that and she came across the border when she was the attorney general of the united states you're honest in this case we were asked to address the issue of whether a b one change the existing law regarding the governmental role element for persecution if everyone's position is that a b one did not change or overrule the existing the government's position is that that sentence that i believe was referred to as opaque is the nexus finding where it says that the law requires st filing that because her demonstrate that the harm she suffered be in order to harm her for a reason that is a part that is protected under the act given that it's talking about that it has to be protected under the act that is the nexus finding and in this case there isn't a nexus to a protected ground right after the agency is discussing the harm experience from her stepfather and also the harm that her mother experienced and then there are two parents articles from the cases we're talking about notable that the petitioner wasn't living at home at the time that her stepfather allegedly murdered her mother she had moved out of the house and was living with her grandfather at the time so it's  not entirely clear what level of persecution impacted her based on the incidents with her mother honor because there was one incident eleven isolated incident mentioned in the record involving a petition on her stepfather and after that she moved out your honor yes  but the government strongest position in this case relates to the unable and unwilling issue and as your as your honor stated regardless of the holding in a b one then maybe two in the discussion surrounding that no matter what in this case the titian or does not demonstrate that the government was unable and unwilling to protect her regardless of the specific terms and language would like to use for that standard nevertheless the government could you back up and explain that a little bit because i think opposing counsel's position is that jailing her father after the fact was not did not protect her mother from the murder what's the evidence going to another and i think you are meant wasn't able to forgive me tried to get help and was unable to get help protection ahead of time there's no evidence that just an error or her mother went to police or government to try to get assistance in fact i believe  arguing the other thing that you said that there's no evidence of futility in the record in fact there is evidence that the one time the police were informed about a crime they invested investigated the matter they searched for position a stepfather who was allegedly the person who committed the crime they found him being gauging the shootout with him that ultimately wounded him they arrested him they detained him they tried him for murder and then at least a year or so and that's the one incident where in the police were advised of a crime the only thing that we have in the record so given all of the night backup counsel forgive me i know it's hard because there's no visual here think the evidence certainly convinces me that there's evidence he was jailed for a year do we know that he was convicted and then released after you know those details pardon me i didn't think i said convicted but if i did say that i did not mean that he was he was tried for the crime and he was incarcerated for over a year and there is not evidence regarding a conviction and there's also not evidence regarding is a legend release we don't really know based on petitioners testimony what happened with her stepfather she really could have been acquitted right we don't know we could've been acquitted maybe you've answered my question i just i think you i think he indicated earlier that he'd been tried and convicted what we know is that he was released and the petitioner testified that after he was released he vanished that's the word that she used and that she never saw him again after that and then aggression judge asked if she knows that the police are still looking for him and she stated  it's not entirely clear what happened but it seems from her testimony that she received some sort of a friend request on social media from who she thought was her cousin but she now believes that was her stepfather and that he posted some pictures but then she signed off same thing because you can be you know have some some tools and abilities and skills but the other side can be so strong that you're unable even though you're not helpless so it's just not the english language to s on i would say that the attorney general was trying to clarify what the terms are not able and willing which are themselves somewhat broad and vague terms how we are using them in the context of the government subset so so if i agree with judge present implied statement that these are not terms it seems like there's two avenues here one is the by by government's counsels argument my understanding is if you think it doesn't matter because she fails on the facts either way but the other problem i think it would would be what it could just take that through if we think if we decide that this new attorney general opinion doesn't comply with the a p a then wh well i guess your honor i would say that this court should look at what all how all the other courts all the other circuit courts except for the d c circuit have used a b one and maybe two that but so so if you could take it as a hypothetical that if we if we if we decide that these terms are not synonymous then what would the next step be would we need to have more briefing and consider the a p a argument would we need to we have what we need on in this case ok i just want to get a look at it if they did i think that's why they did it and your position sounds like it's closer to john suggested this is a statement of the law but not a statement that there was no nexus is if that's your response i don't know anywhere i'm sorry grade the ocean want to say about unable or unwilling i would like to say that i think this was a last ditch effort by the previous administration to curtail a  there was no i mean there there aren't enough there are not enough facts in the case to to actually address that but i think it should be remanded because the judge didn't this court stands in recess for ten minutes