<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Immigration Law Blog &#187; Court Decisions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/category/court-decisions/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com</link>
	<description>Attorney Farhad Sethna - Tel (330) 384-8000 or (877) 7US-VISA - www.Immigration-America.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2010 02:00:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>A Common Sense Approach to Padilla v. Kentucky- Competent Representation in Criminal Cases with Immigration Implications</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/195</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/195#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:09:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>fsethna2009</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Court Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/?p=195</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A lawyer advising a non-citizen client in a criminal matter has an added duty:  to advise the client of the immigration consequences, if any, of a criminal conviction. Failure to advise that results in a deportable consequence or some other immigration detriment, such as inability to naturalize or exclusion, could be the grounds for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Padilla that could result in the underlying conviction being reopened and vacated.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/195/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US Supreme Court issues PADILLA v. KENTUCKY Decision on Immigration Consequences of Criminal Conviction</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/187</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/187#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>fsethna2009</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Court Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/?p=187</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The US Supreme Court issues a landmark decision that could affect the reopening and reduction of criminal sentences if the alien was given poor advice or no advice on the immigration consequences of a criminal conviction. Notable is the concurrence (agreement) by Justices Alito and Roberts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/187/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Appeals Court holds that employer not responsible for visa fees and expenses</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/156</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/156#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 11:33:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>fsethna2009</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Court Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[H1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[L1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[expenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[h-2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[h2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[headhunter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[travel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Visa]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/?p=156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the convoluted world of H-1B non-agricultural temporary worker processing, this case stood out as a good example of the seamier side of hiring foreign workers.  In Castellanos-Contreras, et al v. Decatur Hotels, LLC, Fifth Circuit case #07-30942 (July 21, 2009), the court ruled on a complaint filed by Castellanos-Contreras and two others that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/156/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
