of their arguments they disclose the very best and now they say we don't want to disclose them for some reason what is that reason but why didn't that reason operate before when they were disclosing them all over the place it it is that it is something that they pulled out of case law to avoid cessna's it seems to me that maybe this is confusing are conflating two different issues one is whether this is precision on deliberative and us  covered under exemption five and the second is whether the agency has to disclose the evidence at the ultimate hearing or provide reasons for its decision which strikes me as separate issues than the four year issue and certainly under the statute i look when you get the immigration give it to you before the hearing starts that's what they say one sixth is that how does that affect the current issue of the foyer issue which strikes me as a different issue officer then they're throwing that argument out the window and that that should tell the court that there are reasons that they're giving all we must protect you the asylum officer is not real well that's the generic reason why there's a deliberat process i don't think that an agency has to come in case after case and show the connection in univision case between say some memo it's prepared by a staff lawyer and the ultimate decision in a particular case rather than the limit of process privilege is justified based on its overall objectives and how it generally applies and then once you know that the two requirements are just preach to sit on deliberate in a particular case w sorts of memos packed into a packet and then the final decision maker will do a one line approved disapproved so the only final decision is a one sentence or one line document so that all the other memos don't get this close that strikes me as similar and that's always been done i think to protect the confidentiality the end of line documents it strikes me as similar to what this is your initials here of the final decision maker is different from the assessment well to some about this but i want to ask this if the assessment is used in the proceeding when the immigration court it will be disclosed to you if it's not used and won't be disclosed as that's fair and it may well be but the question is whether on the we have we can determine when the final decision what is the document that is the final decision by at least cases from the supreme court in this court have focused on the importance of knowing what is the role of the document in the agency's decision making process or purposes of determining is the final decision about the nine asylum was that made by the asylum officer in the assessment was it made at the point the supervisor determined that the asylum officers assessment was ok or was the decision not made on you tell you have what you call this useless document it is elevated it becomes the final decision and then goes the immigration court reading it correct and that's no so at the initialing your argument is it ceases to be pretty decision words our court has said that exemption five disposed to be very narrowly construed and there are certain things that the agency has to demonstrate and we have several different views in these papers for us as to when the agency has made its final decision for example if i'm the asylum officer and i say deny the application you look at it you check it it goes on and this referral notice is given all right the other hand maybe the process is that i give you my assessment and you look at over and while it may be legally sufficient you disagree with the conclusion in which case there may be some back and forth between us or if we can't agree cording to the manual you may refer it up to the director or deputy director he or she in turn may refer it on so that terribly clear to me where this decision has been made well i think it is pretty clear from that from the application and for the process that it has the supervisory asylum officer who's making that and how do we know that well it says so in the portion of the  asylum officer agrees with the bottom line are but he may not agree with everything in the recommendations of the asylum office right and that possibility it seems to me illustrates warrant that the a subordinate put in that number rather how all of a city just approved to know there's there's nothing in the record about that you see and this very statement you and i are looking at in line one fifty one says could hear the letter it's is describing what these documents are in general and she's doing so in support of the general proposition that these are the kind of documents that affect agency decision making discussion about government policy and not all of that discussion will necessarily be made public and even if the final decision i think is your theory is a rubber stamp the  know or it's a much more complicated problem and all i'm trying to understand is you're saying that the notice to her or the notice of her is the assessment is that the application should be granted what happens i believe i'm not certain of the process but i believe there is then some notice sent to the asylum africa in the sense of good that were not based only on the asylum officers assessment no it's obviously going to be passed on by the supervisor  obvious well i don't believe the asylum officer has to have already tried right i understand you don't believe it and you maybe may well be correct but i'm just trying to find out what's in the record here if in fact the asylum officers recommendation to grant is what gets the person asylum and clearly that is the final decision of some type if on the other hand it has to go to a supervisor and maybe supervisor doesn't have authority to grant either but it has to go to a director or deputy director but this only deals with the denial part and i just thought the granting part might get some insight it's up to the agency what herd wants to present this evidence and it may or may not what it does so obviously it's a document that has to be presented to the applicant in connection with the hearing and i would not be used in the to examine the evidence against the alien to present evidence on the ariens own make at and to cross examine the witnesses present a public government that sounds like a trial type like it doesn't sound like pretrial discovery and i think it isn't written that way because it is drafted so as to ensure the whites of the asylum advocate at trial to examine this evidence or any other evidence that can be used against  but it's not designed as pretrial discovery that would be available whether or not even the case goes forward here this is producible if and only if the case actually goes who are every government decides to introduce to that for the immigration court to require earlier disclosure that would be great for gratian courts don't do it they say there's no discovery and i understand i'm just saying the remedy you're seeking here and i understand your concern and sympathize with it but seems a mismatch for the issue that you're most concerned about well we would hope there be more remedies of immigration court but then to say to  understand i understand i was a guest of the united states district but u s niceties versus julian is a case to be considered one hundred eighty eight distributing was a complete convicted criminal probation officer is a pre sentence report and it's going to the they gave it to a chief justice rehnquist said that congress is not a tender privilege in this case well isn't that this perfect right for us ok this is a privilege except twelve twenty nine he says you get you get this kind of actually a master hearing is scheduled for june twenty sixth in a master hearing is a one minute adventure where the court says what do you want and we say we want to individual hearing a three year three hours and they'll probably get the skinny seventeen twenty two hour  about twelve twenty nine a that has three parts to it you have the right to examine evidence against him that would be the assessment yes the rights present evidence on his own behalf maybe there's something in the assessment that's useful to the