<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="WordPress/2.8.2" -->
<rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Immigration Law Blog</title>
	<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>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	
	<item>
		<title>A Common Sense Approach to Padilla v. Kentucky- Competent Representation in Criminal Cases with Immigration Implications</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/195</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Arizona Law SB 1070 Exposes a Disturbing Trend</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Arizona Law SB 1070 uses the logic of "immigration compliance" to needlessly trample on the US Constitution, harms US citizens and the non-immigrants alike and damages genuine law enforcement efforts to curb crime.  Severe flaws in the law subject it to strict scrutiny and possible injunction or reversal in the courts.]]></description>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/191</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>US Supreme Court issues PADILLA v. KENTUCKY Decision on Immigration Consequences of Criminal Conviction</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/187</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>USCIS Intends to increase filing fees in 2010</title>
		<description><![CDATA[USCIS intends to increase filing fees across the board. Naturalization fees will not go up.  Most others will.]]></description>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/185</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>What if my NTA was never issued?</title>
		<description><![CDATA[This is an actual question I received via e-mail:
&#8220;Is there an expiry date allowing relief if there has never been issued an NTA? My example is where, after a statement at a port of entry was given and a temporary green card with a one year validity was issued, an NTA was never received and [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/67</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Appeals Court holds that employer not responsible for visa fees and expenses</title>
		<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>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/156</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>DHS and DOL step up audits of H-1B and Labor Cert Sponsors</title>
		<description><![CDATA[	Fueled by the $500.00 per case “H-1B Fraud Fee” paid by employers for every new H-1B application for a new employee, the DHS has instituted significant additional review programs of H-1B employer sponsors.  According to the DHS, over 600 employers nationwide are being audited.  The Office of Fraud Detention and National Security estimated [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/151</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Obama Administration Policy: Enforcement before Reform</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Speaking recently, Janet Napolitano, President Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security indicated that without question the administration’s policy was going to be that of expanding immigration enforcement, especially against businesses.  This comes on the heels of another declaration that H-1B visa sponsors are being audited in much larger numbers, thanks to the additional $500.00 H-1B [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/150</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>USCIS Softens Policy on Battered Spouse Asylum Cases</title>
		<description><![CDATA[July 20, 2009
In the past, the USCIS had previously not objected to asylum grants for battered spouses who feared being returned to their home countries because of the harm they suffered at the hands of their spouse and the failure of the government and police to protect them from such abuse.
However, the prior US Attorney [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/146</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Immigrants Don’t Take Away U.S. Jobs!</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Common myth explored]]></description>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/131</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
