years now to obtain permanent residency for him this case is about whether mr lopez uganda has been a model resident of this country for sixteen years now separated from his three united states citizen children and the boy to do so and the boy does not here address the issue of whether they're going to exercise discretion and sue a spontaneous open or not they say he's eligible under the statute for two reasons they never address whether despite that which they can right now does it make any difference whether you ask them in response to their duty to decide whether to spontaneous mayors to respond to reopen does that make any difference whether or not you ask one three point two eight the broken not withstanding the fact that it's beyond ninety days or any other reason the board can decide for exceptional circumstances to reopen the case and we asked the board to do  in this case is they have this labor certification process right but all the people who apply for it in two thousand if they were in deportation proceedings they can never get it because of the backlog is not correct they never get the benefit of that because of the ba certification approved and then he can't do anything with it because one way or the other he can't come back for ten years he can apply for just one status for ten years either because he overstayed his terry return or because he'd been in the country for more than a year legally right well that's true your honor but you know i mean you literally he was supposed to do the fighting in one thousand nine hundred nine and he didn't even start this labor certification process for some time after he'd already agreed to correct but the so hasn't congress and created a system of offering these benefits that people who are in his situation can never get well it's not that they can  now he can apply to come back for ten years because he was here more than a year he couldn't could voluntarily before that happens but then he did back in mexico and you say he can't come back for ten years so it of voluntary departure but then you could say well he overstayed voluntary departure order he's still here in the united states so what it does is it creates this sort of an anomalous situation where people who  have these labor certifications ultimately granted but it takes three years together and have been here for more than a year and it was designed to help them if it can possibly help them i'm afraid that this  motion for a reopening he can't get the benefit of the situation it's a true catch twenty two isn't it  there was a similar situation and i made mispronounce the case are zadi or as r k and i was where you had the situation where the person is being removed and therefore couldn't pursue the motion to reopen the motion to reopen wasn't decided within the ninety day period and this court says that even though you have two laws there that the way they work together creates of an unfairness and so they deem that under those circumstances there would be a stay right yes your honor so why would that be a similar circumstance although it might be a broad stroke why shouldn't we do that here well are you talking about the  do that and so congress didn't intend that it would take so long and so if it just takes so long because there just so many of these you know that there be some kind of relief and i don't know that this would apply to very many cases in the future because this is kind of an anomalous situation that emphasize that that aspect the only question is how these two provisions interact we confront two new statutory provisions both created by  shouldn't be extended to the watching the in this case be expenses very unique situation where you have a person who if there is no state cannot get the benefit of the labor certification that the government is taking so long to get