DOL, July 26, 2024 "On August 7, 2024, the Department of Labor will host a public webinar to educate stakeholders, program users, and other interested members of the public on the changes to the...
Atud v. Garland (unpub.) "Mathurin A. Atud petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings based on alleged ineffective...
Shen v. Garland "Peng Shen, a citizen of the People’s Republic of China, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. An Immigration Judge ...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/25/2024 "On January 17, 2017, DHS published a final rule with new regulatory provisions guiding the use of parole on a case...
Lance Curtright reports: "After the 5th Circuit’s initial decision in Membreno, [ Membreno-Rodriguez v. Garland, 95 F.4th 219 ] my law partner Paul Hunker (a new AILA member!) reached out to...
"[P]laintiffs sought an order preventing the discovery of plaintiffs' immigration status. The magistrate judge held a hearing prior to issuing his memorandum and order. In his memorandum and order [doc. 65], the magistrate judge found that a protective order was appropriate based upon relevant authority and the claims as presently asserted by plaintiffs. ... [T]he magistrate judge's decision to grant the motion for a protective order was not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. ... The protective order will stay in effect, and the defendants will not be permitted to obtain information concerning the immigration status of the plaintiffs." - Almanza v. Baird Tree Service, Sept. 12, 2012.