we have two major issues in the case basically the question of the definition of what is a particular social group and whether all the women living in quite a bala comprised such a social group and the second issue is whether if they are a particular social group whether they are suffering harassment discrimination and persecution now in this particular case i would like to put most of my emphasis on the persecution because while zuma raised the issue that he was a member of a particular social group before the immigration judge the board ignored that issue completely and dismissed her case on the ground like the only issue she the question we have to consider is does she have a well founded future fear of persecution and we have overwhelming facts and i keep developing since she's been in court in two thousand and five that every year the number of women killed in guatemala is christine and a substantial rate so from the time selena was in court to last year we had a forty five percent increase in femicide it's now from a so i mean i just hemisphere one of the highest in the world and it was tremendous international pressure brought on and last year the government of guatemala and acted to create declaring femicide a specific crime and then last year we had the it was earlier this year the first case involving thymus i was brought before the intermarriage commission on human rights and they condemned the government quite a bala for failing to take these cases seriously well i mean this is a situation the government of guatemala unwilling to do anything about and the femicide like you know it isn't by definition i crying specifically against women lot of people well to answer your question ari yes a lot of people are being murdered and quite a bomb that has one of the highest homicide rates in the world but the femicide are the stink these women are sexually there were seven hundred twenty last year assuming assuming that we go so far with you has to conclude that there is evidence in this record that significant numbers of women in guatemala are being murdered because they're women and i'm willing to assume that even if the numbers of men are percentage of man murdered is higher that doesn't necessarily mean the women murders  that she should be given to saying well if women are the women who are a particular social group and there is evidence that they are being persecuted this high level of homicides then they're not required to show meet the threshold of the ten percent chance of persecution if if my client has a subject to fear which the judge found she had he found she did not have an objective  from a size they are mostly metric relations disputes this is a very unique situation in the world today and i think they have very good reason to fear going back to guatemala physically after twenty one years of living in the united states and coming here as a teenager and now in their thirty's ok why don't we hear from the government then you get a chance to respond an officer of the rest of it and obviously you've got two cases with racially identical fashion  shown any individual as risk of motive of persecution and we have changed not additional in this case why do you say that because the agency reached no holding on and whether women constitute a particular social group under the her could have proven here that her could have introduced evidence in an attempt to prove that women here were killed on account of their gender that there wasn't actually ten percent chance she did not meet that burden and the statistics simply do not rise to that level just an early position or could have introduced evidence that women are subject to more violence than men she did not do so she also did not introduce evidence to show that she is part of a group of women that might be particularly vulnerable she did not assert that she was in any sort of domestic relationship where she might be vulnerable to violence she did not assert that she had any connections to gangs because this is an asylum application the only application she has presented here is her own asylum application and that was and that was not that was not granted because she presented insufficient evidence to either connect the crime in guatemala to gender or to connect herself as an individual to a group that might be vulnerable to risk and there are no other applications that issue to mediate in this case and that it would have good at it especially there is no individual as davenant's here there's a very high crime rate in guatemala but mediation you said this is not suitable for mediation because of the asylum i'm not sure that that is necessarily true i'm not sure that the attorney general has a categorical rule that there's never mediation asylum cases passing that answer is the local officer is that somebody back in d c i would not want to answer that question with absolute certainty right now i kind of was the court of that in a letter but it it simply there's simply nothing that that the department of justice can do to require that in any in any offense there is no that is entirely up to immigration and customs enforcement within  has to mediation the court may ask you a decision on the validity of the agency's removal order and denial of relief here even if petitioner were to receive deferred enforced departure this is an important point is with regard to that particular form of of sort of humanitarian humanitarian and different enforced departure is state of removal it does not affect the validity of the removal order and their move order continues answer you know i want to give anything away that you don't have to give away but i actually have to say it would surprise me if it is not within the power of the attorney general or of someone else within your department to write a letter making some recommendation with respect to humanitarian relief or move her and the but regardless of any of that the question before the court is the validity of the agency decisions i understand and any question of deferred enforced departure would be would you like to respond at this time or you want to make your response part of your presentation in the next case your choice court to do so because considering their situation of all the years they did in the united states headley many guatemalan clients and these two sisters have a brother who is back in guatemala is some of the formalistic proposition why don't you sit down and then get up again and then we're on the next case all right and if you like you can pretend that you sat down