CLE that improves your practice and your bottom line

Immigration Litigation in the 9th Circuit (4th Annual) (CA) (2011)

For the Immigration Practitioner: Learn the Do's and Don'ts from Staff Attorneys, Judges and Experienced Practitioners

You may also be interested in:

9th Circuit Boot Camp (5th Annual): A Beginning and Intermediate Litigation Skills Seminar

Click here for more info.

"I was afraid the level of teaching was going to be over my head, but instructors broke down heavy issues nicely."  Bethania Maria, Esq.

"Well satisfied."  Cynthia Scribe, Esq.

"The faculty was great!  Very articulate & covered a lot of useful information."  Veronica Benigno, Esq.

"Very clear, concise points and lots of specific information about 9th Circuit procedure."  Jessica S. Bobadilla, Esq.

"It was very good.  No need for improvement."  Nadia Farah, Esq.

"Great delivery and to the point.  Practical points for brief writing." 

"Wonderful!  I could listen [to them] for hours!  I appreciate all of the anecdotal comments and practical suggestions!"  Maribel Herrera, Esq.

"Excellent opportunity to get practical guidance from highly skilled practitioner.  Very 'hands on' which is most helpful."

"Perspective and guidance from staff attorneys is important & useful.  I appreciate their time & information."

"This was one of the most informative law seminars I have attended on any subject." Edward Pilot, Esq.

"What I learned today is immediately and directly applicable to what I'm working on. Thank you so much!" Sally Gonzales, Esq.

"This is one of the best programs I've attended on Immigration Practice in the Ninth Circuit." Angela Warren, Esq.

"I enjoyed the written material. The reference material is helpful." James E. Cox, Esq.

"Topics and materials were excellent and both speakers are very knowledgeable. Very helpful." Kelly Zusman, Esq.

"The program was excellent.  I learned a ton, and it demystified the process for me. I would recommend the program to anyone." Sarah Overacker, Esq.


Course Summary

Don't miss this enlightening seminar taught by 9th Circuit staff attorneys and immigration experts. 

This program is designed to give immigration practitioners a comprehensive overview of handling their cases at the 9th Circuit level. 

Our experienced  faculty will include tips on motions practice (procedural, emergency and substantive motions) and brief writing related to immigration cases.  They will also provide an overview of jurisdictional issues arising in the immigration context, discuss the impact of criminal convictions on available relief and judicial review, and provide a substantive discussion of U.S. protection law, including asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention against Torture.

Our panel will provide practical litigation tips as well as substantive law updates.

Please note that this is not a course for the beginning immigration attorney. This course assumes attendees have a working knowledge of immigration law.

This course will focus on improving your immigration practice at the appellate level - the 9th Circuit. 

top of page

What You Will Learn if You Attend This Seminar

  • Practical tips on practicing before the 9th Circuit: 
    • Motions practice (procedural, emergency, and substantive motions)
    • Briefing
    • Standards of review 
    • Jurisdictional issues
    • Mediation 
    • Pro bono counsel 
    • Oral argument preparation 
    • Common mistakes 
  • Petitions for review and rehearing en banc:
    • Differences 
    • Limited use of unpublished panel decisions 
    • Identity of the IJ in the construction of appeal
  • Substantive law discussion, including:
    • Asylum law, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture 
    • Jurisdictional issues 
    • Criminal issues 
    • Credibility determinations 
    • Possible limitations on the availability of relief
  • Practical information regarding associated benefits, such as work authorization, and asylee relative petitions:
    • Credibility determinations and corroboration of claims
    • Relevant jurisdictional considerations
    • The impact of criminal convictions on the availability of relief

 

top of page

Home Study Course

Purchase now »

Immigration Litigation in the 9th Circuit (4th Annual) (CA) (2011)

Click the green "Purchase Now" button to order the audio recording, "Immigration Litigation in the 9th Circuit (4th Annual) (CA) (2011)."  This is a live recording of our 2011 Los Angeles seminar. 

This seminar is approved for 4.0 hours of MCLE credit in California. 

$295 plus CA tax and $7.50 shipping.  Free for Pincus Pass holders!


PDF Order Form

top of page

CLE Specialization Credit

Pincus Professional Education certifies that this seminar has been approved in California for 4.0 hours of Appellate Specialization Certification credit.

Pincus Professional Education certifies that this seminar is approved in California for 4.0 hours of legal specialist educational credit in Immigration and Nationality Law, which includes 1.0 hours of Immigrant Visas/subfield credit and 3.0 hours of Administrative and Judicial Review/subfield credit.

top of page

MCLE Credit

Pincus Professional Education certifies this seminar has been approved for 4.0 hours of MCLE credit in California.

Pincus Professional Education certifies this seminar has been approved for 4.0 hours of MCLE credit in Washington.

Upon request, we will assist attorneys in asking for CLE credit in other states.

top of page

Instructors

Faculty:

Hon. Bruce J. Einhorn
United States Immigration Judge (Ret.)
Pepperdine Law School

The Honorable Bruce J. Einhorn served as a United States Immigration Judge in Los Angeles from July 29, 1990 through January 31, 2007.  In that capacity, he presided over prosecutions initiated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (”DHS”) against non-citizens in the United States whose lawful presence here has been placed into question by counsel for the government, including alleged terrorists.  Judge Einhorn presided over bench trials in which DHS seeks the removal or deportation of non-citizens based on the circumstances of their entry into the country and/or their conduct (including their alleged terrorist and criminal conduct) following their arrival in the United States.  Judge Einhorn also adjudicated the claims for relief of those non-citizens, including their applications for asylum and relief under the United Nations Convention against Torture.  As a young lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice in 1980, Judge Einhorn helped draft the final version of the Refugee Relief Act, which for the first time in U.S. history gave non-citizens the right to apply for asylum in the United States.  Judge Einhorn thus adjudicated claims under the very statute of which he was a principal draftsperson.  He has served as the Liaison Immigration Judge for Los Angeles and has also served as an instructor at the training academy for newly appointed Immigration Judges.  In November 2007, Judge Einhorn hosted a National Conference on Asylum at Pepperdine University.

Judge Einhorn is now a Professor of International, Immigration, Asylum and Refugee Law at Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA, where he also serves as Founding Director of the Law School’s Asylum and Refugee Clinic.

Recently, the President-elect of the American Bar Association appointed Judge Einhorn to serve on the ABA’s National Commission on Immigration.  At the same time, the non-partisan, D.C.-based think tank, The Constitution Project, has appointed Einhorn as its first member of its new National Immigration Committee.  As an ABA member, Bruce Einhorn also serves as a member of the organization’s Judicial Division.

Bruce Einhorn has lectured on issues of international humanitarian law before the International Association of Refugee Law Judges, and has served with its Committee on Vulnerable Peoples.  He has also conducted continuing legal education seminars for the American Immigration Law Association and the Los Angeles County Bar Association.  Finally, he has conducted seminars on the interplay of federal immigration law and California criminal law before the Los Angeles County Superior Court Judges’ Conference, the State Public Defenders’ Conference, and several law school classes of several universities.  He has also appeared on ABC television, Fox News, and CNN to discuss and advocate immigration reform, and National Public Radio to discuss national security and civil liberties in the post-9/11 world.  Einhorn has also spoken to the Muslim Students Association of UCLA Law School on the dangers of ethnic and religious profiling post-9/11.  Judge Einhorn was the judge who dismissed deportation proceedings against the last of the “L.A. Eight,” Palestinians accused of engaging in terrorist activities.  Einhorn found the government’s failure to disclose potentially exculpatory evidence against the respondents to constitute a denial of the latter’s due process and statutory rights.  The Department of Homeland Security decided to drop its appeal of Judge Einhorn’s dismissal of the cases 

As an Immigration Judge, Bruce Einhorn issued major decisions on the granting of asylum to the following persecuted peoples:  religious minorities, including Muslims from Europe, Evangelical Christians from the Middle East, China, and Russia, and Jews and Bah’ai members from Iran; women facing “honor killings,” victims of female genital mutilation and of rape in Africa, South Asia, and parts of the Arab world; racial and ethnic minorities from Nigeria, the Sudan, and Indonesia; and political dissidents, gays, and lesbians from many countries.  Bruce Einhorn was also the first Immigration Judge to grant asylum to HIV-positive individuals and disabled children who faced socially-based persecution and the denial of available medical treatment in their native countries.  Einhorn is currently working on his professional autobiography, and on a book about the legal and political culture of citizenship in the West, and particularly the United States.

For his judicial work, Bruce Einhorn has received the Human Rights Award of the Bah’ai community in Southern California, a Plaque of Honor from the Mexican-American Bar Association, a Career of Merit Award from the Cuban-American Bar Association, and Certificates of Merit from the Arab-American and Iran-American Bar Associations of Southern California.  He has also received a Lifetime Professional Achievement Award from the California State Bar.

Since 1991, Judge Einhorn has also served as an Adjunct Professor of Immigration Law, International Human Rights Law and War Crimes Studies, and Legal Ethics at Pepperdine University School of Law in Malibu, California.  He also sits on the Law School’s Board of Visitors.  In 1997, Judge Einhorn received the Law School’s David McKibbin Excellence in Teaching Award.   Einhorn is now a Professor of Law at Pepperdine where he directs the law school’s Asylum and Refugee Law Clinic, whose students under his supervision represent indigent asylum applicants in federal administrative, trial, and appellate proceedings.

Since 1990, Bruce Einhorn has participated as a lay activist in the work of the Anti-Defamation League (“ADL”).  He has held various positions in ADL, including Life Membership on the League’s National Commission and membership on its International Affairs,  Legal Affairs, and Civil Rights Committees (the latter for which he helped approve submission of ADL friend-of-the-court briefs in U.S. Supreme Court cases, including those involving the expansion of rights for Guantanamo Bay detainees), and the Chairmanships of the League’s Pacific Southwest Regional Board and its Los Angeles-based International Affairs Committee.  In the latter post, Bruce Einhorn has engaged in extensive liaison activities between ADL and the Los Angeles-based Consuls General of foreign countries.  As an ADL leader, Einhorn helped draft the Declaration of Los Angeles, which called for a carefully balanced national policy of protecting homeland security and immigrant rights, and which strongly criticized the activities of so-called “minute men” who attempt to become involved as vigilantes in border security and who in part have been linked to racist organizations.  The Declaration has been co-signed by a number of civil rights groups and was recently adopted by the Los Angeles City Council and California State Legislature.  Currently, Einhorn participates as a founding member and as Co-Chair of the ADL Latino-Jewish Roundtable of Los Angeles, and also works with the Consuls General of Mexico, Israel, Germany, Canada, and other countries on initiatives involving the international rights of women and ethnic and religious minorities. Also, as an ADL leader, Einhorn has spoken extensively on the separation of church and state, and has lectured to federal district court judges on sentencing guidelines for those convicted of federally defined hate crimes.

In 1999, Bruce Einhorn was honored for his ADL activities with the Daniel Ginsberg National Leadership Award in Civil Rights, presented to him in the presence of President Bill Clinton at a ceremony at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, the home church of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  He has also been honored for his ADL activities by Representatives Howard Berman and Xavier Becerra of the U.S. House of Representatives, the California State Legislature, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, and the Los Angeles City Council.  As a Jewish communal leader, Einhorn has also received a Lifetime Professional Achievement Award from the State of Israel.

From October 1979 through June 1990, Bruce Einhorn served as a special prosecutor and later as Chief of Litigation for the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations (“OSI”) in Washington, D.C., which is charged with seeking the identification, denaturalization, deportation, and prosecution of Nazi war criminals who escaped justice after World War II and have resided illegally in the United States.  As an OSI prosecutor, Einhorn conducted investigations and trials of Nazi-era persecutors of Jews, Roma, Slavs, Jehovah’s Witnesses, homosexuals, prisoners of war, and political dissidents.  He conducted trial depositions of eyewitnesses to atrocities.  Many of those depositions were taken in the former Soviet Union, Poland, East and West Germany, and France.  Einhorn also participated in appellate arguments on behalf of OSI cases.  For his work at OSI, Einhorn received three Justice Department Special Achievement Awards, the Attorney General’s Special Commendation Award, and the Distinguished Graduate Award of New York University School of Law.  Bruce Einhorn was largely the basis for the character of the prosecutor in the motion picture, The Music Box.

Judge Einhorn has served as a senior advisor and interview instructor to Steven Spielberg’s Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation, which has taken and preserved over 50,000 oral histories from Holocaust survivors.  Einhorn served as a consultant on the Spielberg-produced film, The Last Days, which won the 1998 Academy Award for Best Documentary.  Judge Einhorn is also a founding member of both the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., and of the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles.

Between November 2008 and January 2009, Bruce Einhorn served as an advisor on immigration law and policy to both the George Soros-financed “Apple Seed Project” on immigration court reform, and the Obama Transition Team through the law firm of Arnold and Porter.

Bruce J. Einhorn received his B.A. degree in history in 1975, magna cum laude, from Columbia College of Columbia University, and his J.D. degree in 1978 from New York University Law School.  He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa, the national honors fraternity.  In 1986, Judge Einhorn received NYU Law School’s Recent Graduate Award.  From September 1978 to September 1979, Einhorn served as a judicial law clerk with the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.  In 1979, he was accepted into the U.S. Justice Department’s Honors Program for Distinguished Law Graduates and Clerks.  He is a member of the Bar of the United States Supreme Court, and a member of the American Bar Association, the American Constitution Society, the American Academy of Political Science, the American Civil Liberties Union, the U.S. Supreme Court Historical Society, the Organization of American Historians, the Abraham Lincoln Association, and the Theodore Roosevelt Association.

Bruce Einhorn has written op-ed pieces for The Los Angeles Times, The Los Angeles Daily Journal, and other newspapers.  Judge Einhorn’s publications also include the following:  (1) Political Asylum in the Ninth Circuit and the Case of Elias-Zacarias, 92 San Diego Law Review 597 (1992); and (2) The Prosecution of War Criminals and Violators of Human Rights in the United States, 19 Whittier Law Review 281 (1997).   Judge Einhorn also recently served as a co-author of the book Refugee Roulette (published by NYU Press), which analyzes the disparity in asylum grant and denial rates by the U.S. Immigration Judge nation-wide and which proposes reforms in the asylum adjudication process.  He also wrote a piece on the same issues in the January 2010 issue of Albany Law School’s Government Law Review.  Einhorn has also authored thousands of judicial opinions.

On matters of immigration law, Bruce Einhorn has argued cases before the United States Courts of Appeals for the Ninth, Sixth, and other Circuits, and before the U.S. Supreme Court.  He has given numerous lectures on federal appellate and trial advocacy for health care professionals and attorneys in matters of medical malpractice law.  He is engaged in discovery referee activities and arbitration and mediation work with Alternative Resolution Centers in Century City, California.  Einhorn has also been involved in bar conferences on the economic impact of immigration and on copyright and intellectual property law.            

Judge Einhorn serves on the Board of Directors of the Beverly Hills Bar Association, and on the Executive Committee of the Immigration Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association.  In addition, he is a member of the Boards of the Americans for Democratic Action in Southern California, the Progressive Jewish Alliance, and the Jewish Labor Committee.  He is also a member of the Union of Reform Judaism and of the American Zionist Movement, the NAACP, and People for the American Way.  

Robert B. Jobe, Esq.

Law Office of Robert B. Jobe
Instructor Portrait

Robert B. Jobe is widely recognized as one of the nation’s finest immigration litigators. He has litigated at all levels of the federal court system (including the United States Supreme Court), testified in the United States House of Representatives, authored numerous articles and a leading treatise on the law of asylum, and lectured widely on immigration-related issues. In recognition of his achievements, Mr. Jobe has been awarded the American Immigration Lawyers Association’s Jack Wasserman Award for Excellence in Immigration Litigation (Houston, Texas 1998), the Immigrant Legal Resource Center’s Phillip Burton Award for Outstanding Immigration Lawyering (San Francisco, California 1993), and the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom's Constitutional Rights Award For Outstanding Legal Service Against the Use of Secret Evidence (Washington, D.C. 2001). In 2005, 2006 and 2007, he was named one of Northern California’s “Super Lawyers” by San Francisco magazine.

Mr. Jobe has served as counsel in several of the most significant immigration cases of the last decade: Asylum: Through his litigation efforts, Mr. Jobe has defined the contours of asylum law in the western United States on issues ranging from the definition of persecution and whether the threat of persecution must exist country-wide to whether an alien who has engaged in "terrorist activities" can be barred from asylum as a danger to national security. See Bhasin v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2005), Lolong v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 1215 (9th Cir. 2005), Narayan v. Ashcroft, 384 F.3d 1065 (9th Cir. 2004); Cheema v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 848 (9th Cir. 2004); Li v. Ashcroft, 356 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2004)(en banc); Kankamalage v. INS, 335 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2003); Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2000); Borja v. INS, 175 F.3d 732 (9th Cir. 1999)(en banc); Harpinder Singh v. Ilchert, 63 F.3d 1501 (9th Cir. 1995); Hardev Singh v. Moschorak, 53 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 1995); Surinder Singh v. Ilchert, 69 F.3d 375 (9th Cir. 1995); Jagraj Singh v. Ilchert, 801 F. Supp. 313 (N.D.Cal. 1992); Matter of N-M-A-, Int. Dec. 3368 (BIA 1998).

Criminal Aliens: Mr. Jobe has litigated a wide variety of cases relating to criminal aliens, including Murillo-Salmeron v. INS, 327 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2003) (simple drunk driving is not a crime involving moral turpitude); Kankamalage v. INS, 335 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2003) (the particularly serious crimes bar to asylum does not apply to guilty pleas obtained before the bar's enactment); Park v. INS, 252 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2001) (to be a crime of violence, an offence must have a mens rea of at least recklessness); Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728 (9th Cir. 2000) (convictions for simple possession of a controlled substance which have been expunged pursuant to a state rehabilitative statute can not be a basis for deportation); Aguilera-Medina v. INS, 137 F.3d 1401 (9th Cir. 1998), (lawful temporary resident aliens who have been convicted of alien smuggling within five years of a "brief, casual, and innocent departure" are not deportable).

Suspension of Deportation: Mr. Jobe was at the forefront of efforts to blunt the impact of legislation (enacted in 1996) which restricts the availability of suspension of deportation (a defense to deportation which had been available to aliens who have lived in this country for more than seven years). In Barahona-Gomez v. Reno, 167 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir. 1999), aff'd 236 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2001), Mr. Jobe challenged the government’s refusal to adjudicate applications for suspension of deportation until the legislative restrictions took effect. Through that litigation, Mr. Jobe and his co-counsel obtained an injunction against the deportation of hundreds of class members.

In Guadalupe-Cruz v. INS, 250 F.3d 1271 (9th Cir. 2001), Castillo-Perez v. INS, 212 F.3d 518 (9th Cir. 2000), and Matter of N-J-B-, 21 I & N Dec. 812 (BIA 1997), Mr. Jobe challenged the government’s application of the new "stop time" rule, which requires a suspension of deportation applicant to demonstrate that he or she had accumulated seven years physical presence in the United States before the commencement of deportation proceedings. In Guadalupe-Cruz, the court precluded INS from applying the stop time rule to applicants who had hearings before April 1997. In Castillo-Perez, the Court ruled that the stop time rule can not be applied to aliens who would have had a hearing on their application for suspension of deportation before April 1997 but for the ineffective assistance of a former attorney.

Visa Processing: In 1995, Mr. Jobe and his best friend from law school, Daniel Wolf, spearheaded a pro bono legal challenge to the Department of State's policy of refusing to issue immigrant visas to Vietnamese boat people detained in Hong Kong. See,Legal Assistance for Vietnamese Asylum Seekers v. Dep’t.of State, 45 F.3d 469 (D.C. Cir. 1995)("LAVAS I"); Legal Assistance for Vietnamese Asylum Seekers v. Dep’t. of State (LAVAS II), 74 F.3d 1308 (D.C. Cir. 1996); and Vo Van Chau v. Dep’t. of State, 891 F. Supp. 650 (D.D.C. 1996). In LAVAS I, the D.C. Circuit declared the State Department’s policy unlawful. The State Department appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case. Shortly before oral argument in the United States Supreme Court, Congress amended the Immigration and Nationality Act to specifically override the D.C. Circuit's decision in LAVAS I. The Supreme Court then vacated LAVAS I and remanded for reconsideration of the legislative changes. As a result of the litigation, however, over 100 Vietnamese nationals living in refugee camps in Hong Kong were able to immigrate to the United States.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: Maravilla-Maravilla v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 855 (9th Cir. 2004) (to establish prejudice, aliens alleging ineffective assistance of counsel must show only plausible grounds of relief); Matter of N-K- and V-S-, I & N Dec. 879 (BIA 1997), (an attorney's failure to notify an alien of the date, time, and place of her exclusion hearing constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel and requires reopening of an exclusion proceeding conducted in absentia). On May 8, 1996, Mr. Jobe testified before the United States House of Representatives Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights about the need to enact legislation to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture.Before going into private immigration practice, Mr. Jobe investigated violations of the laws of war in El Salvador on behalf of Americas Watch (now Human Rights Watch) and contributed to a lengthy report on human rights violations in El Salvador, The Civilian Toll (New York: Americas Watch 1987). He also served as the Supervising Attorney at La Raza Centro Legal (July 1988-January 1990), was an associate attorney at McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen (August 1987 - July 1988), and a legislative aide in the Michigan House of Representatives (1982-83).

Allison Taylor, Esq.
Staff Attorney
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Allison Taylor has been a career Staff Attorney in the Motions Unit for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit since January of 2006.  Her focus is on immigration litigation, civil rights cases and habeas corpus petitions.  Prior to joining the Ninth Circuit, Ms. Taylor was an Assistant Chief Counsel for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in San Francisco, handling immigration cases.  Ms. Taylor previously worked as a Federal Public Defender.

Stacy Tolchin, Esq.

Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin

Stacy Tolchin recently opened the Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin.  She previously headed the Los Angeles offices of Van Der Hout, Brigagliano & Nightingale, LLP. Ms. Tolchin primarily litigates before the Courts of Appeals and U.S. District Courts, and speaks regularly at conferences regarding federal court immigration litigation. Ms. Tolchin is the recipient of the American Immigration Lawyers Association’s 2009 Jack Wasserman Award for Excellence in Immigration Litigation, the 2009 American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California Equal Justice Advocacy Award, the 2008 recipient of the National Immigration Law Center Annual Award, a 2007 Recipient of the “Unsung Hero” Award for the National Lawyers Guild of the Bay Area, and was recognized in 2003 by the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee of San Francisco.  She is a member of the Board of Directors of the National Immigration Project for the National Lawyers Guild, a member of the Board of the Southern California Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, and a member of AILA.  Ms. Tolchin is a graduate of University of California at Los Angeles (JD).

Jonathan Westen, Esq.
Staff Attorney
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Jonathan Westen is a Staff Attorney in the Research Unit of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and has been with the court since October 2004. He currently serves as the legal adviser of the Immigration-Asylum group and for the past two years Mr. Westen has trained new staff attorneys on immigration issues.

Prior to joining the Ninth Circuit, Mr. Westen clerked for U.S. District Court Judge Bruce D. Black in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and subsequently served as a dedicated clerk to Chief U.S. District Court Judge James A. Parker for the espionage trial of Wen Ho Lee.  Mr. Westen also spent several years as an associate at Heller Ehrman.  Mr. Westen graduated from Boalt Hall School of Law in 1999, where he was a member of the inaugural class of the International Human Rights Clinic.

top of page

What attendees have said about this seminar:

"Both speakers had a refreshing ease to elicit and receive supplementary comments from each other and from the audience. This really enhanced the flow and delivery of information."

"Great!" 

"Wonderful!" 

"Really good!  Informative!" 

"Excellent practical tips.  Very informative."

"Engaging."

"Superb content and delivery.  Instruction re: oral argument was particularly helpful."

"Good nuts & bolts."

"Excellent guidance in brief writing!"

"Appreciated the outline provided."

"Intelligent [speaker] - asked court staff attorneys excellent, pertinent questions."

"Practical tips were helpful."

"Excellent handout!"

"[Judge] is very well informed with unique tips from the bench."

"Great points and advice."

"Good points; useful tips."

"[Jobe] was great!"

"Great speakers!"

"Very valuable & helpful."

"Great perspective.  Very informative." 

"Very insightful." 

"Everything was great." 

"Excellent speakers!" 

"Excellent!  Very knowledgeable and engaging." 

"A great source of knowledge and practical experience."

"Great presentation and great team."

"This program was very informative, thank you."

"[Speakers were] great! Very responsive to audience questions."

"Great job!"

"Presentation was very informative and interesting. Gave a very good overview of the process."

"Materials are very helpful."

"Good resources provided."

"All of the speakers were very informative, and the court attorneys seemed very approachable."

"[Speaker] was excellent and quite unpretentious."  James C. Angleton, Esq.

"Good information & very knowledgeable on topic."

top of page

Terms & Policies

Seminar, Webinar, Webcast Registration and Attendance Terms & Policies

Reminder: The room temperature at hotels and other seminar locations are notoriously hard to control. Please bring a sweater or jacket in case it gets cold and/or layer as if you are going to the movies so you are comfortable.

Recording policy: No audio or video recording of any program is permitted.

Seminar Cancellations: Should you be unable to attend for any reason, please inform us in writing no later than 14 days prior to the event and a credit voucher will be issued. If you prefer, a refund, less a $50 non-refundable deposit, will be issued. No refunds or credits will be given for cancellations received within 14 days of an event.

Substitutions may be made at any time.

Webinars, Tele-seminars and Webcast Cancellations: Once log-in codes and passwords are issued for a webinar, tele-seminars or webcasts, a refund is not possible. If for any reason you cannot attend the event after you have received the codes, we will automatically convert your registration to an instant streaming/instant download or CD format and provide you with the information you need to access the recording after the program concludes and the recording is available.

Return/Refund Policy for Tapes/CDs/DVDs:

Tapes, CDs and DVDs are returnable for a full refund or replacement if defective, within 90 days of purchase.

top of page

For news and information about upcoming seminars

View our Seminars page.

top of page

Featured Charity

Halo Cafe
For many Fresno families, who are struggling financially, the responsibility of caring for a pet can simply be too much and they are forced to do the unthinkable - surrender their loyal companion.

At Halo Cafe, our mission is to help families keep the promise they made to their pets to love and care for them forever by providing pet food to those who cannot afford it on their own. This pet food pantry exists to serve low-income families, elderly and homeless community members in an effort to keep pets with their people and out of the already overcrowded shelters. Donate Today


 

Subscribe for CLE Announcements