immigration appeals here when they determine that an extensive beating by five men two of whom were police officers combined with death threats to himself and his son in five months of extortion payments did not rise to the because that's that is it essential part of the asylum cancellation analysis absolutely is it is your honor understands to be the protected group that was identified by the immigration judge was someone who's perceived as a restaurant manager or business owner and one of mala why my client wants that in any way something that satisfies the definition of a group it's quite mutable it seems to me people work in person who is educated perceived as a business owner and readily educated business owner in guatemala in dozens or substantially expand protected past for example educated landowners has been found to be particular social group single women in albania has been found to be a particular social group so it has been expansive   when he returns for that reason but there's no particular aspect with regard to a restaurant manager that extends throughout the restaurant managers it's now there's nothing no he just nothing consistent about what they are but what he was viewed with he was viewed as he was viewed as the restaurant owner and in the transcript he says the judge as transcript or in the in the st hearing but didn't didn't the the immigration judge infer from that basically that he was saying that they had gone after him because they perceived him of someone having money you know who would be a good person to extort but there are plenty of cases that say that's just a an ordinary criminal motive it's not like being is part of an ethnic group or being you know part of a political affiliation or part of you know certain family clan or sub ethnic group that would be a social group you know single women even which have a particular rise social status in certain countries so how do you get away from this you know they wanted money extortion is a crime shouldn't be doing but that's what was happening well i think your honor this is a person who he's educated i think he's going to be viewed as someone who can always be able to obtain money once they determine that court determined that once money was gone or if it was due that they no longer have money or could get money then they would be left alone and i think mister issa point is is not going to be in that situation because he's always going to be perceived as educated he's always going to be perceived as is having the ability to make money through his knowledge of the restaurant working as a restaurant or or other me ok so on the other side of this i wanted you to say a word or two about the convention against torture because torture has to mean something other than mistreatment by by the public anything that terrible an unfortunate that he he wasn't badly injured in it and i want to know how it crosses the line in your view from mistreatment to torture well i think if we c covert case b level of injuries in the level of harm upon the individual is extremely simple and i would even say that in our situation mister is a situation it's worse he was in his situation he was attacked not only by members of the game but he was also attacked by members of the police to members of the police it resulted in scars he tried to show the immigration judge at the hearing the level of his scars and i think that when you read the code of federal regulations definition of torture under the convention against torture i think it meets that requirement especially if you compare it to the standard  the wife was assaulted i should say not a severe social salt that he had to sit through but in our case we have it are the police officers and then we also have that coupled with five months of extortion payments we have that with obviously a very credible death threat to both him and his son in those it and when you compare those things with the standard koblick i think we're we're definitely on the same level and i would say that you know in our case it's even more severe you the nd thing that i did want to point out to the court is this nexus analysis that the immigration judge and the board adopted with the end indicated is that mister ray has had to show that the persecutor was trying to overcome his status such analysis is just not based on a sidelong the knowledge ability for asylum withholding or convention against torture is to start with the asylum claim his claim is based soley on the past harm he experienced in guatemala which he asserts was inflicted on immutability particularities social distinction that have been defined to identify valid social groups but in this case there was no evidence and still less evidence compelling the finding that appointed as was harmed because he was a restaurant manager rather than the mere causal connection of often just a crime of going after people who have money is insufficient to establish a basis for asylum under the nexus requirement as for the argument that there is no requirement and this or intend to overcome or punish this requirement is from the very earliest days of asylum law decision cited in my brief include matter of a cost and matter of maga robbi up through the attorney general sessions matter of a b decision that this is a consistent requirement in immigration law and that this court's decisions are consistent with that cases like  where a criminal group is motivated by financial gain and picks you out because you have money that doesn't show a motivation i have a particular social group so many strangers to say though i had some sympathy for the idea that the phrasing overcome social groups seems quite obfuscating to me i mean it's what the statute says and what the regulations say is that it southern europe or you know it just i need to know what that means so i wonder if you can elucidate that or maybe it's just maybe that's just too narrow of phrasing and we need to be more fulsome in the way we talk about said it's really more the evildoer is out there the government sponsored evil doer and is saying we're going to beat up you know all the sikhs in town and we're going to we're go you because you're a seagull mess you should renounce your religion and then dropped another one i mean there i mean there are all of these other victims that you might be wanting them to change or not you thank you very much mister christopher thank you thank you your honor that you just wrote briefly you know again to cite the regulations they define torture has any act by which severe pain or suffering whether physical or mental is intentionally inflicted on a person and being severely beaten by five million cling to officers resulting in scars with a model that compounded with the extortion payments that compounded  with the death threats i think by by the reading of that definition we meet that here so i see my time i see my time is up thank you all right thank you very much i thank you both counsel the