Black v. Decker "These tandem appeals arise from habeas petitions brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 by legal permanent residents Carol Williams Black, in No. 20-3224 (Schofield, J.), and by Keisy...
Stankiewicz v. Garland "In this case, we must decide whether N.J. Stat. § 2C:35-7, which criminalizes distributing a controlled substance on or near school property, is an “aggravated...
NIPNLG Practice Advisory, May 28, 2024 "The purpose of this guide is to provide practitioners with a comprehensive resource for representing adult clients detained by DHS in immigration court bond...
Superlitigator George A. Terezakis writes: " This case involved Judge Kolbe at Varick Street. I extensively briefed her demonstrated bias and hostility throughout the proceedings, and her repeated...
Huynh v. Garland "Nguyen Chi Cuong Nmn Huynh petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) order affirming that he is removable because he was convicted of a state crime constituting...
Matter of Cognizant Technology, Sept. 29-30, 2016- "For the reasons stated below, we find that: (1) the Employer‟s COLA is a wage adjustment and not merely a per diem payment; (2) because the wage is not required to be stated in newspaper advertisements and in additional professional recruitment steps, a denial for failure to state a locality pay adjustment based on § 656.17(f)(3) or § 656.24(b)(2) is not supported by the regulations; and (3) the regulations could be reasonably construed to require statement of a locality pay adjustment on a notice of filing in order to sufficiently apprise interested persons about the job opportunity, but the Employment and Training Administration‟s (“ETA‟s”) regulations, forms and instructions provide no notice of such an interpretation of the regulations (nor a means for reporting such a wage adjustment on the Form 9089). Accordingly, we find that a denial based on a lack of statement of a locality pay adjustment in the NOF in this case cannot be sustained. ... Therefore, despite the CO‟s identification of a valid issue and his reasonable interpretation of the regulations, absent ETA having provided employers notice of its regulatory interpretation concerning the requirement that COLAs be disclosed and a mechanism by which it can be accommodated, we decline to affirm a denial based on failure to state a locality pay adjustment on a NOF, in advertisements, or on the Form 9089."
Erratum: "On September 29, 2016, the Board issued a Decision and Order Directing Grant of Certification (“decision”) in the above captioned matters. On the first page of that decision, the caption and a footnote to the caption stated that the decision involves 382 applications. That was an error. Rather, the decision involves 372 applications, as listed on the appendix to the decision. Accordingly, the Board is issuing this Erratum to clarify the number of applications involved. In all other respects, the decision remains the same."