please the court is worse you know good morning so i was going to start off with was the idea for my favorite movie the big lebowski when smokey goes over the line walter so check says in terms i can use i only one that cares about the rules and in light of the last argument we have it's kind of the opposite argument in so much is in the last argument attorney general barr was saying well this immigrant did not exactly follow the rules correctly as listed in the regulations and so therefore he doesn't have relief available to him i've got the opposite argument in the certified record i sent ice a letter saying ok i've got this notice of intent for you to some deport my client to all salvador and i need the documents you have here's the code here's the timeline as i have it set out they sent me those documents and there's just a wait i believe ten days then they immediately send my clientele salvador in contravention of the united states code and the code of federal regulation giving him no opportunity to contest the idea that there is proof that is clear and convincing and unequivocal that he's been convicted of an aggravated felony else will assuming that there is this violation of the rules and statute in probably a constitutional violation as well is this panel free to presume that that results in  factual circumstance i think that you should presume prejudice under the sort of due process idea that he should be given an opportunity for even the mildest of hearings which could include simply counsel giving written argument in your honor should presume that can i back up to the jurisdictional point yes as you know there's a written separate motion to dismiss and of course they've raised in their brief and they say that we don't have any jurisdiction over the removal order and that you're not really appealing the reasonable fear case so therefore they say we don't get to any other issues in the case because we have no jurisdiction at all ok so i've had a little trouble  to be perfectly honest with you it's based on what we've done in many civil cases and other cases so it it's it's not frivolous right i don't think it's frivolous either i wasn't suggesting that oh you said you didn't understand it well i'm just missing to my own ok so you're not it you're not issue here go ahead so then what i'm hearing then is the result of that is that if if i therefore  negative felony and then not only that then they don't have any remedy in this court or in any other court that well botia is for stay we get them all the time help me with why that isn't what's in order so most of her stay is something different a motion stay with ice is a form that's filed discretion it's an i in to forty cell i'm talking with us once we have the case go ahead or any other court has the case proceed ok so you're talking about a stay file with you guys yeah there's a case i ask for a stay right in this case we've had none of that before this day none of that we've had an ice agent that said mr cardosa i think even if they can immigrate a felony he runs and hires an attorney me i send them a letter and i say i want you to send me these documents and they do and on the same day stamp the order give it to him send him down salvador so i'm not sure where the state comes in to be honest with you because would it be at that point then that i seek a stay with you all based on the ice officer issuing this feel that he believes that there's clear and convincing and unequivocal evidence of i think to file st in the district court that help me if i'm not kno for following your argument no they're not you have the certified record the certified record shows this is then an ice agent serve my client with this order that says i i say agent think that you have been convicted of felony my client hires me i sent him a letter i said the code requires you to send me this these documents after i get them i have ten days to respond to you and they just remove him anyway like the judicial officers after a ice agent a police officer essentially makes his legal determination i mean a rate of felony conviction and then that in follow the code to bit so not only was i not able to make an argument i wasn't able to make a record at all and so let's follow up on that counsel get given that whether or not his crime of conviction was an aggravated felony under federal brief that frankly would have been even more in depth in the one i gave you guys to explain that this is not an aggravated felony and i didn't get to do that i'm not a witness but this is what i do i mean i get referred these cases to these them to the immigration judge and the b i and he hires attorney and he wanted to make that argument i frankly i don't know this might sound boastful but i think i could convince an ice agent that it's not an aggravated felony and act i've noticed over the course of my practice that we said t you know i could have included that in the record none of that's in the record and you're all fair to say none of that's in the record mr bergman which is my point i didn't get a chance to advocate on behalf of my client at all as judge woman pointed out this is bureaucracy my salvadoran immigrant client does not have the capability to make those arguments and he wanted to make those arguments to show that there is not clear and convincing shiny general your honors i would like to start today on just addressing your question about jurisdiction to start with because i think there's a little bit of confusion about that and i'd like to clear that  petitioner in this case still had pending reasonable fear proceeding and in accordance with positions that we've taken other circuits and which other that there was no longer there i'm sorry that there was not a final order from move all in that case that both the question of relief and the question of removal had to be finished before a petition for review could be filed before this court on the time the reasonable fear proceedings completed and at that time the petitioner filed a nd petition for a view under are not stating that there is no jurisdiction of this court over the final administrative removal order in general i guess i would say because this court ha law and that he's seen that there was the intention to file a i mean to issue a final administrative removal under order and basis that he's an aggravated felon under eleven a one hundred and forty three apparently some confusion about where he should send it because it's actually a little bit confusing on the record but he says that there perhaps wasn't the other side of the copy given however in the record  you don't mind if i shorten it to the from now on he clearly knows that this for is being issued on the basis of his iowa conviction there's no question about that and the petitioner has repeatedly conceded that he knows what but he was convicted of this i was a conviction of this under this i was statute there's no question about that so the only thing that he is stating here is i want some more time to has clearly conceded that he his he he has been that he was convicted under the iowa statute here but only for remaining questions for t excuse me to address here it would honestly be an exercise in futility to remand this to the just work basketball metaphor no harm what you know to go to judge grasped point earlier that the question of of a prejudice here that he simply can't show that there was any other outcome that is the standard a prejudice here that the two cases that i cited in my brief regarding prejudice specifically had to do with evidence for a reason and one of them it was a question in the evidence that is brock up to the board so that this court was looking at it in the st instance sort of like it's doing here and in that circumstances the court found that there was no prejudice categorical approach revolution i know i'm the only fan of the categorical approach in the courtroom right now but it's an important approach in a protect immigrants and had i had the chance to get my brief done that's what i lives in norwalk and that's kind of the point this is due process and the last time i was in front and i've never been in front of your honor before the last one was in front of your honor's i ask you to think what will be the result of this case and the result of this is going to be that ice is going to claim everything's an a grade a felony whether it is or not there is a simple assault well that's an aggravated felony assault and so here it is we're not waiting the time because the circuit doesn't care if we wait for the time or not and you've got and you're set in el salvador and so it's an important case i don't frankly have these sorts of problems the st time this ever happened in my practice but it's an important case and it's not frivolous and it is not merit less and it is important and so judge woman's asked a couple times a day what should the ruling be in a paragraph and when to say it should be this is it ice is ordered to coordinate with attorney bergman to get mr cardoza back from el salvador to turn himself in at a port of entry and to give mr bergman and mr cardoso the time to develop the record and arguments as required by the united states code thank you your honor thank you the argument c