resistance to gain recruitment would qualify as a grounds for asylum whether that is a kind of social group at the crux of petitioners argument is his resistance to getting recruitment was an expression of neutrality meaning he perceived gangs to represent a sort of gang would be an identifiable cognisable group here my the previous attorney may not have delved into what all the grounds were for the petitioner to refuse the membership in th  but the courts at the time the immigration judge also had an obligation to base his denial with an explanation as to why that could have been a ground he just made a blanket denial after finding the petitioner credible that you know he failed to establish membership in any group citing things that were not exactly relevant for example both the immigration judge and the board relied on the continued so called safe presence of his mother and all salvador to find that there would be no well founded fear or in addition that he failed to establish membership in a social group consisting of family members mother's live there safely doesn't strike me as illogical to suggest that whatever persecution might have taken place of the father wasn't because of being a member of the family and wouldn't necessarily extend to him otherwise you'd expect the mother to be persecuted the logic but that doesn't help you does it i mean in the end there really isn't a basis to say there wasn't substantial evidence to support the conclusion that there was not persecution based on family i disagree because if you're not the decision maker where's the what is it that that's lacking in that conclusion the disregard of the fact that the gang members evokes the petitioner's name in which supposedly not of call the mother if she didn't have a son are right if it was because it was meant for the family then they would have it after the mother as well as the son if it was because he was and then it because he opposed to gangs they'd be after the son but that's it hell not to be cognizable social group but one could have more than one ground for an axis i know i could carry and i think that mix them up you have to i mean you have to make a set of arguments and a coherent with regard to each of them exactly so there is no evidence in the record that the gang targeted the mother outside of the facts or for a different reason but for her relationship to their petition well there's no evidence that i should say that but let's move to the social group the broader social  group unfortunately for your client two months ago our court comes out with with radius and that case we reject the social group that it's former members of the mara eighteen gang in el salvador who over announced their membership how was your case  conclusion that's not a viable definition for a social group for the purposes of the statute and i don't see how your client doesn't have the same problem well the petitioner is distinguishable in the sense that he would be easily recognizable he did not have any tattoos did not have any of them i honestly do not think that is an interesting argument that at some point somebody might be able to prove up on a record but you didn't really do it here i mean it could be that at this pointed out salvatore there are so many gang members that if you walking around with have gang and tissue you're quite obvious and and a target but you said you didn't post that up in any useful why should we send it back to give give a do over because the petitioner did establish that refusal to participate in a group that holds such significant ma'am please the current this is dan a camel larry for the attorney general in this case called him as has not shown that he suffered past persecution at the hands of the gangs when he described simple harassment well i don't know about that i before the agency the political opinion which is a completely separate ground from a particular social group not argued before the agency whatsoever and then i think in the opening brief they pivoted away from the particular social group aside from the immediate family  in fact did not really challenge that portion of the decision which is why we argued that was a waiver so it's difficult to see you know what and this is more hypothetical than based on this record but i think i just seems to me that in a sufficiently gang pervasive place which el salvador may be at this point now for young men of a certain age not having gang sing new york tattoos may be a sight precisely the kind of marker a literally visible social group now i understand this record doesn't establish but there's no case to actually deals with that either on a record it doesn't establish it is there i'm not aware of any cases where that was raised before the board certainly that's something that the agency would need to get the first crack at the sherrod case telling was being in one gang the supposed to another gang i mean it seems to me that would be sort of a classic social i mean if if your claim was that my problem is and i'm an ex gang and why gangs after x gang is there any case about whether that's a social group i have not encountered one i believe that there are maybe only one or two organizations that are very prevalent  maras essentially but i some sort of something out of you know domestic gang organizations and it seems to me in some ways a kind of classic social groups in the sense that you know these young men say you know what what  she did not pay and no harm to her and she's just remained there i believe it was a decade harmed and el salvador so really undercuts that claim and again in the opening brief  they did not address that particular portion of the board's decision case is submitted and we will go on to cope universes ryan and for planning purposes we will take a break after this case