in this case my client an immigration case in which the i j demeanor the undersigned rarely if ever has based in negative credibility to terminations primarily on demeanor and is reluctant to do so here issue here really is is i think psychological here talking matter problem with numbers her problem with numbers yes your honor so so years do you think the discrepancies in dates have to do with her problem than in remembering numbers the right way that's correct your honor that is that is something that we prior counsel are you saying did not bring it up to the ok there's there's there's numerous there's numerous record instances for instance she was she would say that she was nervous and know she would clutter let me ask you something she may have trouble was numbers this a four thousand yuan but then she testified on the one hand this you started going to church meetings in two thousand and one and then on the other hand so the show you going to church meetings in two thousand and nine is that an inconsistency result explained because she has trouble with numbers i think i think two thousand and fourteen there are other instances in the record that she had that she confounded numbers confounded other circumstances she would clutch her throat the immigration judge said you know stop hurting yourself wires you're heading your lap and she i think that was a little hyperbole by me ask you is there any probability that her difficulty with numbers said explains on the one hand when she said she was unable to contact her mother while in detention am not ok it's it's not good for you and i wanted you to have an opportunity to speak to it because an immigration judge there noted that an alien was visibly nervous when confronted with evidence the individual would move his hands speech was notably faster had an almost desperate tone when to confrontations and the ninth circuit essentially up elde the b i determination about credibility based on those factors and i wanted you to speak to how that differs from what we have something akin to a learning disability i know that this that the contention that is a learning disability is there to record evidence  but it is our position that there is a lot of a lot of ways of looking at it through the through through the record that shows that there is a lot of confusion in this case the the immigration judge is dealing with a difficult situation and you can you can see it in  the in the in the transcript he's getting testy she's getting upright and there's a lot of difficulty in getting this particular trial as deep situation on to meaner but he felt that he had to in this particular case met matter of ma'am what was handed down into in two thousand and a number of issues about intensity of how people can be or your position on that is if you take it has to be that the immigration judge here followed matter versus ma'am but came to a conclusion employments factors that led you to appeal essential a correct yes  same discredited testimony to establish eligibility for that form of protection with respect to demeanor as such and pointed out she laughed in appropriately she clutched her throat she gave long pauses  nervous but it didn't seem like the immigration judge built this into his interpretation of the demeanor evidence in any way undermine it what should be our confidence in the   nervous explanation wasn't persuasive to hands he dealt with that explanation and moreover all of this talk of possible learning disabilities or psychological differences was not presented to the agency and so the court last year's direction to consider the arguments in the first instance now is misleading really believes that she has a very disability and it impacted her ability to present her case she presented a motion to reopen before the board and the board can consider that as evidence in the first instance but she has not done so here moreover there is not even any evidence in the record to support the claim other than the statement that numbers made her nervous numbers make a lot of people nervous but that doesn't mean they have a learning disability related to them that will encourage her to testify and from personal experience numbers  inconsistency that i find problematic is the differing accounts as to the four thousand r and b to bail her out between li and her mother yes i agree i think it would be very different if your daughter wearing detention and you had not heard from her and an authority figure called you how to get her out of general and if your daughter herself called and explained how do  hear out if you hadn't heard from your daughter in days and you knew she been arrested a call from her would be profoundly reassuring even if they contained information about how did the owner al that would be very different than getting a call from her jail or telling you how to get her out and so the idea that misleads mother must have just made a mistake because it has been four years since the arrest when she wrote the letter doesn't hold weight or at least doesn't compel the conclusion that ms lee testify credibly and the court has will repeatedly rule that if one of the grounds of the adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence then the horse is found to hold the entire adverse credibility finding so that finding if the court finds that that petitioner she's nervous and she's acting strangely and that's the basis for making adverse credibility binding do you find this case unusual i mean it makes me i didn't ask questions even simple questions and a petition would give long pauses or not answer the question and the court had no problem to hold in the adverse credibility determination so in this case the demeanor finding which included reliance on long found out that she was fired she does not dispute that the discrepancy about who told her mom about the bill about is present in the record for the most part she doesn't dispute that these things are in the record and so the record cannot compel the conclusion that she  ma'am and no where in his in his decision does it come up the i g did say are you are you able to testify you under a medication or anything or are you just nervous misses and honestly i'm just nervous really and they go on a little bit about that but that's not really what the i g should be doing if he has a doubt that there's possibly a competency issue or an inability for her to understand what the proceedings are thank you you're on is all right thank you very much coun