Seminar  Program

Bond Basics and Prolonged Detention Bond Proceedings in the Ninth Circuit, Including Updates Since Jennings v. Rodriguez (Free)


Select a Location:

Why You Should Attend
Each year in the United States, The Department of Homeland Security places over 400,000 in immigration detention.  Data shows that release from immigration detention on bond not only allows noncitizens to avoid detention during exceedingly lengthy court proceedings, but also greatly increases their success rates in ultimately avoiding deportation.  Because individuals in Immigration Court proceedings generally only have once chance at a bond hearing, and bond is so vital to their cases, lives, and families, it is imperative to have a firm grasp of basic bond issues, such as how to adequately prepare clients for bond hearings.  Even attorneys who have had experience handling bond hearings will benefit from a thorough review of the constantly evolving legal determinations of bond eligibility and the legal issues that often arise after bond is denied.

This three-part training is designed to provide immigration attorneys with the basic tools necessary to determine bond eligibility and to represent detained clients in bond proceedings, including the knowledge necessary to zealously advocate for clients subject to prolonged detention.  This training will focus on practice in the Ninth Circuit and will address the recent Supreme Court decision Jennings v. Rodriguez, and what advocates in Northern California are doing to advocate in favor of periodic bond hearings for individuals subject to prolonged detention.

What You Will Learn
Who Is Eligible for Bond Hearings Initially? How to determine initial bond or conditional parole eligibility based on the client’s immigration history and criminal background, including Matter of Joseph hearings, and how to request a bond hearing for your client.
Who Is Eligible for Bond Proceedings Once Detention Is Prolonged? How to determine eligibility after the Supreme Court’s February 27, 2018 opinion in Jennings v. Rodriguez and how to obtain a prolonged detention bond hearing for your client.
How to Prepare for a Bond Hearing? General mechanics and tips on preparing clients and witnesses for custody hearings and the different burdens of proof for initial bond hearings and prolonged detention bond hearings.

Who Should Attend
All attorneys assisting, or considering assisting, immigrant clients in the Ninth Circuit who are detained or subject to conditions of custody, including private and pro bono attorneys, public interest and non-profit organization attorneys, would benefit from attending this program.  Participants are expected to have a basic knowledge of immigration law, but need not have prior experience with representing detained clients.

PLI Group Discounts

Groups of 4-14 from the same organization, all registering at the same time, for a PLI program scheduled for presentation at the same site, are entitled to receive a group discount. For further discount information, please contact membership@pli.edu or call (800) 260-4PLI.

PLI Can Arrange Group Viewing to Your Firm

Contact the Groupcasts Department via email at groupcasts@pli.edu for more details.

Cancellations

All cancellations received 3 business days prior to the program will be refunded 100%. If you do not cancel within the allotted time period, payment is due in full. You may substitute another individual to attend the program at any time.

9:00 Opening Remarks
Monica Oca Howell, Valerie Anne Zukin

9:10 Who is Eligible for Bond Hearings Initially?
How to determine initial bond or conditional parole eligibility based on the client’s immigration history and criminal background, including Matter of Joseph hearings, and how to request a bond hearing for your client.

There are four primary detention authorizing sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) for non-citizens the Department of Homeland Security seeks to remove, including:  (1) INA §235(b), which addresses individuals seeking admission to the U.S. who are deemed to lack valid admission documents, pursuant to the expedited removal provisions; (2) INA § 236(a), which authorizes the discretionary detention of certain non-citizens in removal proceedings; and (3) INA §236(c), which deems individuals charged as inadmissible or deportable pursuant to certain criminal-related grounds ineligible for bond; and (4) INA §241, which authorizes a period of mandatory detention for individuals who have been ordered removed.  This panel will provide a brief overview of the foregoing statutes, and also focus on how attorneys can determine whether detained clients are bond hearing eligible and how to request bond hearings. The panel will also cover when bond proceedings may be requested pursuant to Matter of Joseph, where there is a basis to contest the client’s removability.
Christina H. Lee, Valerie Anne Zukin

10:10 Who Is Eligible for Bond Proceedings Once Detention Is Prolonged?
How to determine eligibility after the Supreme Court’s February 27, 2018 opinion in Jennings v. Rodriguez and how to obtain a prolonged detention bond hearing for your client.

After an initial bond hearing, §1003.19(e) limits requests for subsequent bond hearings to written requests showing that the alien’s circumstances have changed materially since the prior bond hearing.  According to Matter of Joseph, 22 I&N Dec. 799 (BIA 1999), a respondent is always entitled to a hearing to determine whether he or she is subject to mandatory detention.  During a “Joseph Hearing,” where an attorney challenges whether a client is subject to mandatory detention, one can argue that a client was never convicted of a crime, that the client is not removable, or, depending on the circuit, may be able to argue that ICE did not take custody of the client directly from physical criminal custody.

On February 27, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit ruling in Jennings v. Rodriguez, ruling that immigrants do not have a right to periodic bond hearings.  This panel will discuss pending litigation challenging the denial of six month bond hearings for respondents in reinstatement proceedings and other similar cases.  There will also be a discussion regarding individuals in withholding-only proceedings, and how they are still eligible for prolonged detention bond hearings under Diouf v. Napolitano.
Lisa Knox, Alison Pennington

11:10 Networking Break

11:25 How to Prepare for a Bond Hearing?
General mechanics and tips on preparing clients and witnesses for custody hearings and the different burdens of proof for initial bond hearings and prolonged detention bond hearings.

This panel will focus on how to best advocate for clients to be released on bond or conditional parole. In preparing for a bond hearing, it is important to meet directly with the client beforehand to adequately prepare him or her for testimony.  Additionally, supporting documents should be gathered for the detained client, including letters of support, proof of status of family members, and proof that a client will be entering into a rehabilitation program, depending on the circumstances of the case.  Aside from working with the client directly, as well as the client’s family members, other factors to consider are having pre-trial discussions with the Office of the Chief Counsel, preparing a witness list, and establishing a record for appeal.  This part of the panel will review the nuts and bolts of presenting a strong case during custody hearings, and also discuss what the immigration judge wants to know and will weigh as factors in determining whether your client will receive bond.  There will also be a discussion regarding issues to consider in the context of pro bono representation.
Lisa Knox, Christina H. Lee

12:25 Adjourn

Co-Chair(s)
Monica Oca Howell ~ Senior Immigration Attorney, CARECEN
Valerie Anne Zukin ~ Lead Attorney Coordinator, Northern California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice
Speaker(s)
Lisa Knox ~ Immigration Staff Attorney, Centro Legal de la Raza
Christina H. Lee ~ Founding Partner, Becker & Lee LLP
Alison Pennington ~ Senior Immigration Attorney, Centro Legal de la Raza
Program Attorney(s)
Christina Thompson ~ Senior Pro Bono Program Attorney, Practising Law Institute
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered. If two or more individuals wish to participate in a webcast and receive credit, PLI would be happy to provide a Groupcast – group viewing of a webcast. To schedule a Groupcast, please contact PLI at groupcasts@pli.edu.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

California:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Kansas:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Kentucky:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Louisiana:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Minnesota:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Mississippi:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Montana:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Nebraska:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional live webcasts can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Ethics credit, professional practice credit, and law practice management credit may be earned via transitional live webcasts. Skills credits may not be earned via live webcasts.

North Carolina:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

North Dakota:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Ohio:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

South Carolina:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live interactive” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live interactive programs.

Washington:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

West Virginia:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

Wyoming:  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live webcasts.

CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “real-time” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via real-time programs.

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “interactive” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s live webcasts can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 points of distance learning programs per reporting period.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s live webcasts can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for live webcasts vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “Group-Internet-Based” (GIB) credit.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as "instructor-led" credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an SHRM professional can earn via instructor-led programs.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s live webcasts qualify as “live” training events. There is no limit to the number of credits a candidate or certification holder can earn via live programs.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists (CAMS):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill CAMS credit requirements.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill SW CPE credit requirements.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s live webcasts may fulfill CFP credit requirements.

 

Why You Should Attend
Each year in the United States, The Department of Homeland Security places over 400,000 in immigration detention.  Data shows that release from immigration detention on bond not only allows noncitizens to avoid detention during exceedingly lengthy court proceedings, but also greatly increases their success rates in ultimately avoiding deportation.  Because individuals in Immigration Court proceedings generally only have once chance at a bond hearing, and bond is so vital to their cases, lives, and families, it is imperative to have a firm grasp of basic bond issues, such as how to adequately prepare clients for bond hearings.  Even attorneys who have had experience handling bond hearings will benefit from a thorough review of the constantly evolving legal determinations of bond eligibility and the legal issues that often arise after bond is denied.

This three-part training is designed to provide immigration attorneys with the basic tools necessary to determine bond eligibility and to represent detained clients in bond proceedings, including the knowledge necessary to zealously advocate for clients subject to prolonged detention.  This training will focus on practice in the Ninth Circuit and will address the recent Supreme Court decision Jennings v. Rodriguez, and what advocates in Northern California are doing to advocate in favor of periodic bond hearings for individuals subject to prolonged detention.

What You Will Learn
Who Is Eligible for Bond Hearings Initially? How to determine initial bond or conditional parole eligibility based on the client’s immigration history and criminal background, including Matter of Joseph hearings, and how to request a bond hearing for your client.
Who Is Eligible for Bond Proceedings Once Detention Is Prolonged? How to determine eligibility after the Supreme Court’s February 27, 2018 opinion in Jennings v. Rodriguez and how to obtain a prolonged detention bond hearing for your client.
How to Prepare for a Bond Hearing? General mechanics and tips on preparing clients and witnesses for custody hearings and the different burdens of proof for initial bond hearings and prolonged detention bond hearings.

Who Should Attend
All attorneys assisting, or considering assisting, immigrant clients in the Ninth Circuit who are detained or subject to conditions of custody, including private and pro bono attorneys, public interest and non-profit organization attorneys, would benefit from attending this program.  Participants are expected to have a basic knowledge of immigration law, but need not have prior experience with representing detained clients.

PLI Group Discounts

Groups of 4-14 from the same organization, all registering at the same time, for a PLI program scheduled for presentation at the same site, are entitled to receive a group discount. For further discount information, please contact membership@pli.edu or call (800) 260-4PLI.

PLI Can Arrange Group Viewing to Your Firm

Contact the Groupcasts Department via email at groupcasts@pli.edu for more details.

Cancellations

All cancellations received 3 business days prior to the program will be refunded 100%. If you do not cancel within the allotted time period, payment is due in full. You may substitute another individual to attend the program at any time.

9:00 Opening Remarks
Monica Oca Howell, Valerie Anne Zukin

9:10 Who is Eligible for Bond Hearings Initially?
How to determine initial bond or conditional parole eligibility based on the client’s immigration history and criminal background, including Matter of Joseph hearings, and how to request a bond hearing for your client.

There are four primary detention authorizing sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) for non-citizens the Department of Homeland Security seeks to remove, including:  (1) INA §235(b), which addresses individuals seeking admission to the U.S. who are deemed to lack valid admission documents, pursuant to the expedited removal provisions; (2) INA § 236(a), which authorizes the discretionary detention of certain non-citizens in removal proceedings; and (3) INA §236(c), which deems individuals charged as inadmissible or deportable pursuant to certain criminal-related grounds ineligible for bond; and (4) INA §241, which authorizes a period of mandatory detention for individuals who have been ordered removed.  This panel will provide a brief overview of the foregoing statutes, and also focus on how attorneys can determine whether detained clients are bond hearing eligible and how to request bond hearings. The panel will also cover when bond proceedings may be requested pursuant to Matter of Joseph, where there is a basis to contest the client’s removability.
Christina H. Lee, Valerie Anne Zukin

10:10 Who Is Eligible for Bond Proceedings Once Detention Is Prolonged?
How to determine eligibility after the Supreme Court’s February 27, 2018 opinion in Jennings v. Rodriguez and how to obtain a prolonged detention bond hearing for your client.

After an initial bond hearing, §1003.19(e) limits requests for subsequent bond hearings to written requests showing that the alien’s circumstances have changed materially since the prior bond hearing.  According to Matter of Joseph, 22 I&N Dec. 799 (BIA 1999), a respondent is always entitled to a hearing to determine whether he or she is subject to mandatory detention.  During a “Joseph Hearing,” where an attorney challenges whether a client is subject to mandatory detention, one can argue that a client was never convicted of a crime, that the client is not removable, or, depending on the circuit, may be able to argue that ICE did not take custody of the client directly from physical criminal custody.

On February 27, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit ruling in Jennings v. Rodriguez, ruling that immigrants do not have a right to periodic bond hearings.  This panel will discuss pending litigation challenging the denial of six month bond hearings for respondents in reinstatement proceedings and other similar cases.  There will also be a discussion regarding individuals in withholding-only proceedings, and how they are still eligible for prolonged detention bond hearings under Diouf v. Napolitano.
Lisa Knox, Alison Pennington

11:10 Networking Break

11:25 How to Prepare for a Bond Hearing?
General mechanics and tips on preparing clients and witnesses for custody hearings and the different burdens of proof for initial bond hearings and prolonged detention bond hearings.

This panel will focus on how to best advocate for clients to be released on bond or conditional parole. In preparing for a bond hearing, it is important to meet directly with the client beforehand to adequately prepare him or her for testimony.  Additionally, supporting documents should be gathered for the detained client, including letters of support, proof of status of family members, and proof that a client will be entering into a rehabilitation program, depending on the circumstances of the case.  Aside from working with the client directly, as well as the client’s family members, other factors to consider are having pre-trial discussions with the Office of the Chief Counsel, preparing a witness list, and establishing a record for appeal.  This part of the panel will review the nuts and bolts of presenting a strong case during custody hearings, and also discuss what the immigration judge wants to know and will weigh as factors in determining whether your client will receive bond.  There will also be a discussion regarding issues to consider in the context of pro bono representation.
Lisa Knox, Christina H. Lee

12:25 Adjourn

Co-Chair(s)
Monica Oca Howell ~ Senior Immigration Attorney, CARECEN
Valerie Anne Zukin ~ Lead Attorney Coordinator, Northern California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice
Speaker(s)
Lisa Knox ~ Immigration Staff Attorney, Centro Legal de la Raza
Christina H. Lee ~ Founding Partner, Becker & Lee LLP
Alison Pennington ~ Senior Immigration Attorney, Centro Legal de la Raza
Program Attorney(s)
Christina Thompson ~ Senior Pro Bono Program Attorney, Practising Law Institute

San Francisco Seminar Location

PLI California Center, 685 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105. (800) 260-4754.

San Francisco Hotel Accommodations

Park Central Hotel, 50 Third Street, San Francisco, CA 94103. 415-974-6400. When calling, please mention PLI and SET#287179. In addition, you may book online at Park Central Hotel PLI.

Omni Hotel San Francisco, 500 California Street, San Francisco, CA 94104. 415-677-9494.  When calling, please mention Practising Law Institute.  You may also book online at PLI Omni 2018.

Due to high demand we recommend reserving hotel rooms as early as possible.

General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama: PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

California:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Illinois: All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Iowa:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Kansas:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live programs.

Kentucky:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Louisiana:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Maine:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Minnesota:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Mississippi:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Missouri:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Montana:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Nebraska:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Nevada:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

New Mexico:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional live seminars can be used to fulfill the requirements for newly admitted attorneys. All credit categories may be earned via transitional live seminars.

North Carolina:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars

North Dakota:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Ohio:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania: PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

South Carolina:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Tennessee:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Vermont:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live interactive” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live interactive programs.

Washington:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

West Virginia:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Wyoming:  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “real-time” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via real-time programs.

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “interactive” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC): PLI’s live seminars can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit. There is no limit to the number of points an attorney can earn via live seminars.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s live seminars can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” credit in all Australian jurisdictions. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via live seminars.

Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA): PLI’s live seminars qualify as “Group-Live delivery” credit.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE): PLI’s live seminars may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s live seminars may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s live seminars may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s live seminars may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s live seminars qualify as "instructor-led" credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an SHRM professional can earn via instructor-led programs.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s live seminars qualify as “live” training events. There is no limit to the number of credits a candidate or certification holder can earn via live programs.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists (CAMS):  PLI’s live seminars may fulfill CAMS credit requirements.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s live seminars may fulfill SW CPE credit requirements.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s live seminars may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s live seminars may fulfill CFP credit requirements.

 

Share
Email
“I really appreciate the sample motions. The information was useful, practical, and very clear. Thank you for providing these timely and relevant free webinars."
- Lea McDermid, Attorney at Law
  Law Offices of Lea McDermid, LLC

“Thank you for this amazing program!”
- Vitoria Pinhas
  Immigration Attorney
  New York, NY

“Thanks for the great information that's useful regardless of your Jurisdiction.  The fact that the Webinar is FREE is extra great.  Looking forward to more!”
- Calvin Biggers, Fairfield, Alabama


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.