with this court's decision in don't and it's a dangerous precedent that precedent would be to allow a detained alien to skip the administrative procedures that have been set out by the agency that have been approved by the courts and go straight the government's take a stay i don't believe so you are almost not request for a stay from the district court correct and no state request to this court correct your honor so your idea is the actual bottom out and are we going to let the sent these individuals out they have been let out as you're correct or are there was no state sought to keep them locked up pending appeal but the question then is what's going to happen in the next case when well i would hope in the next case the government would seek a stay and refused at the district court would come to the court of appeals when they ask for a stay so the issue remains why presumably that lesson would be learned for the future are but it's also a question of what's what's going to happen when the next alien or the next council sees what this court does and the danger of the district court's decision in this case is that without requiring what this can you have the right to request reconsideration here's how you do it you'd like an advisory opinion saying you've got to exhaust your administrative requirements and and then the ins can set forth reasonable bond requirements or something like that i'm hesitant to say an advisory opinion put in with the district court's order in this case specifically said orders in both cases you do not have to exhaust her administrative remedies that's the that's the key i think to the answer to the original inclined to do that your honor with all respect there's no authority to do that and if you do it we're going to ask for a stay in if you refuse the stay we're going to the court of appeals because this ain't right but you didn't do that here that's but so you want an opinion that the opening line with the something like even more of this the horror the horses out of the barn this case is over it's done the only thing left to do is send it back to district court and have them stamp the file closed we thought while we were other we would write a few of our thoughts about what might happen in the future is that what you want us to do i don't think i could ask for that much your honor but i think the question is what what i think it does come in to what is the what are the it if you want to ask for reconsideration because you can't afford in your opinion to make fun you can ask for reconsideration and in this in both cases the aliens were put on notice of that they chose not to seek reconsideration in particular in the in mr trance case the government came back and said look we told them here's how you speak reconsideration they haven't done it therefore we're sticking with what we've got while arguably one interpretation of what happened in the district court was the bond issue  require a bomb i think it's certainly one possibility are weighing against that conclusion is are a couple things first the way that the decisions that particularly master judges recommendations finding and recommendations were worded was shown us that you can't pay therefore we will find you you can't pay but what the court did was to was to put it in the opposite order and essentially what they did was trying to think about of an analogy as i came in and said i started the baseball stadium just because the giants are up six nothing in the seventh inning the game's not over you still have to play the rest of the game you have to complete the record and the problem with the district court's decision in this case is that if it deprives this court of a complete record so please if you want to seek reconsideration come back to us that's how you complete the record and that's how you can say for example not only can i afford to pay i have twenty seven cents in my purse and bank account i have no family completely different but there are important distinctions between i ask and a bond determination looking over the questionnaire for inform a proper status there's no question on there that says if you have an aunt uncle sister brother whoever who could make your bond there's no question to that effect and that's and that's a significant difference and it goes to one of the purposes i think a bond which is if i am released on a five thousand dollars bond that my sister theoretically i'm going to be a lot less likely to breach that bond because my sister will be out the money so there are important distinctions between i have p and a bond determination you think carbonation whether  was lost none of my family's going to give me bond anymore ok then the agency can come back and perhaps negotiate some different requirements of the conditional release maybe maybe the five thousand dollars bond becomes a thousand dollars bond maybe it does go to  they've been ordered deported the only reason they're still here in the united states presumably it's because the government of vietnam won't take them back over go back a long as you are we don't know that and i think if you'd asked a representative of the government of that twenty years ago you get a different answer and if you asked that question fifteen years ago but certainly there's been a amazing progression in the in the diplomatic relations between the united states and vietnam and i can't stand here on behalf of the united states and say that five years from now or two years from now that things are going to be exactly the same or they're going to be totally different and that goes to why the united states government is under the so obvious case is not allowed to hold someone forever indefinitely spring court said you can hold them for six months but the on that you can't correct you on are you proposing that the government be able to extend that six months for all of this von process question is can you use that bond determination process to extend the six months and if you can for how long i think the answer to the first question is it's not met bond is not meant to continue as as a a lock on the door it's meant as a condition and of release the actual timing of it there is no requirement that the that the process start five months and thirty twenty nine days or four months but  it's presumed that in setting those conditions of release things will happen in a timely manner in this in these cases but if they don't so that's where hevia comes in here and that's where it did in fact that the system worked to a was talking about earlier the district court didn't have all of the information that it should have had when it made its decision as a result this court doesn't have as complete a record as it should have in order to make a decision yes i want to hear from the  great would you introduce yourself for the record thank you carolyn wakin from the federal defender's office on behalf of mr tran and mr pro morning and i your point is well taken i think the movement's arguments bond decision didn't come out until about the ninth month that person's detention in the other case it came out mr trans case it came out just before the six month period had ended and in both cases they didn't come parties to try to work out the bond questions and at the end of the twenty days no decision had been made to lower the bond a petition or he looked at the i immigration bond part of it is when is it going to be fulfilled there's a person ordered deported to vietnam there's no clear end date to get to that period of time that might never happen so why are they going to put up all this cash that might never there might never be an endpoint that bond so in my experience people have to put up the entire amount themselves excellent question if you look at the c f r regulations regarding immigration detainees i believe it's at the end of ninety days of that first ninety day removal period the district director for the local field office is supposed to conduct a file custody review the petitioner doesn't do anything to trigger that it's just it's supposed to happen at the end of ninety days  one of these cases there is an indication that a file called to review was done although it wasn't completed until after the six months which is when the five thousand bond was set and the other cases there's nothing in the record to suggest regulations and the standards that they would use to the type of information it would provide is not stated in any regulations and so you know on top of the fact that in twenty to forty one  these both were there is no exhaustion requirement in this particular protest area of law how one would exhaust and what the administrative process really is is it's really completely unclear and what factors go into making a plan decision is completely unclear so that is why i think especially when someone has fifty or six month period  judge back a look at the overall procedural history of these cases and at their client's financial status and decided he was not going to stay the hague b s to allow for this sort of vague procedure to take place which is not would you prefer that we dismiss his mood or opine on the procedural processes as you have described it from the standpoint of my client i think