Category: Legal Views

Tara Burd

San Diego Civil Litigation Attorney Tara Burd | The Perils of Failing to Hire an Attorney After You’ve Been Sued

See My Who Is San Diego Civil Litigation Attorney Tara Burd says “As a general rule, once you have been served with notice of suit and provided a copy of the complaint filed against you, you must file a written response with the Court. Most commonly, you have a mere thirty calendar days to file your written response.” See CCP § 420.12.

If you fail to file your response in time, the other party may prevail against you and receive what is known as a “default judgment.” There are legal mechanisms to cure a default judgment (i.e., obtain relief from a default judgment), but the best course of action is undoubtedly to avoid defaulting in the first place, if possible. Like all orders, defaults are enforced rigidly. Even though you may have never appeared or presented any counter arguments to your opponent’s claims, you will be liable for the damages assessed by the Court. In other words, you will be bound by the Court’s order and responsible for paying that which the Court has awarded your opponent(s).

Should you fail to abide by the Court’s order and pay the judgments to which you are bound, the other party can enforce the Court’s awards against you. This means you could be subject to wage garnishment, liens against your property, and other financially disastrous consequences.

Avoiding these consequences requires a good responsive pleading. In order to avoid the perils associated with defaulting, you should file a proper, timely response. Not just any type of response will do, and the Courts have basic guidelines concerning the form your response must take. Most often, the applicable rules can be found on your Court’s website. It is very important that you follow your Court’s rules in responding, as there are consequences for failing to file in a timely fashion and for failing to ensure that your response follows the proper form. Again, an inadequate, improper, or untimely response may result in the opposing party obtaining a default judgment against you.

Legal proceedings turn on the facts unique to the case before the presiding court. Accordingly, the unique facts surrounding your case should dictate the manner in which you choose to respond to the allegations being leveled against you.

This article examines three of the most basic responses are: the Answer, the Motion to Strike, and the Demurrer.

Providing an Answer to the Pleadings

The Answer is the Defendant’s opportunity to challenge and controvert the Plaintiff’s allegations in the Complaint. The Answer serves the purpose of filtering out matters that are either immaterial or simply not at issue.

In terms of the Answer’s form, the Defendant may respond to the Plaintiff’s allegations by admitting, denying, or claiming she lacks knowledge of the facts giving rise to the substantive allegations.

In addition to admissions and denials, the Answer should also contain any affirmative defenses the Defendant wishes to assert. An example of an affirmative defense when Defendant failed to make a payment, because he had a good reason to such as a Plaintiff’s failure to properly perform.

Attacking the Pleadings with a Motion to Strike

Motions to strike can be used to attack a pleading in its entirety, or can be used to attack specific parts of the pleading. The grounds for the motion to strike are to strike any “irrelevant, false or improper matter inserted in any pleading” or to strike any pleading in whole or in part “not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule or order of court.” CCP § 436.

As long as it is filed in a timely fashion, a motion to strike constitutes a general appearance and prevents the entry of a default judgment. This means that the Defendant may wait to file an answer while the motion to strike is pending.

Attacking the Pleadings with a Demurrer

Demurrers are used when pleadings are so defective that it makes defending against them unnecessarily difficult. Often this is the result of the vague pleadings, or pleadings so loosely tied to fact that discerning their meaning proves difficult. The demurrer acts as a test of the legal sufficiency of other pleadings, raising issues of law (not fact) with the substance or form of the pleading it is attacking.

These are just the basic concepts of responding to a lawsuit. Deciding which approach to take and which are the most effective require experience understanding your case and the local court system.

For more information visit Tara Burd’s Who Is Page here in the Journal

San Diego Civil Litigation Attorney Tara Burd
You may contact her at her office
T.Burd Law Group
945 Fourth Ave., #307
San Diego, CA 92101
Or by telephone 858-215-2873

San Diego Professional Journal
2830 Keats St., Suite F San DiegoCA92106 USA 
 • 619-870-0097
Tara Burd

San Diego Civil Litigation Attorney Tara Burd | Ignore Itches Not Lawsuits

See My Who IsSan Diego Civil Litigation Attorney Tara Burd says “One common way of dealing with problems is to just ignore them.”

That works for some problems. Ignore the itch in your shoe and it might just go away.  Ignore an annoying passenger on the bus or train car and eventually you will get off.  Ignore a legal proceeding against you and you could face a judgment against you, attorneys fees, penalties, interest, a lien on your home, and wage garnishment.  It’s a really really bad idea to ignore a lawsuit.  People know this, and do it anyway.  Then they get served with a lien or wage garnishment and run to the attorney to undo it.  Run fast, because the clock is ticking on any opportunity to undo a final court order.

To begin with, understand that an appeal probably cannot fix a default judgment.  An appeal asks the appellate court to review an underlying case and determine whether there was a mistake on the law and whether this mistake affected the final outcome.  An appeal does not rule on the merits of the case (except for in small claims court.) An appeal does not allow the appellant to make an emotional plea for a second chance.  A defendant who failed to show up for court in response to an initial action does not have grounds for an appeal.

Instead a defendant who discovered he has a judgment against him will need to ask the court to vacate or set aside his judgment. (CCP § 663.). In short, a party may be entitled to a different judgment if the original judgment was based on an “[i]ncorrect or erroneous legal basis for the decision, not consistent with or not supported by the facts…”. This makes sense for a litigant who was actively involved with the case and received a unfavorable ruling by judge or jury.  It doesn’t make much sense for a party that ignored the problem.

The Civil Code of Procedure also authorizes relief from judgment on grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.  (CCP § 473(b).)  However, it requires that a motion be made within 6 months of judgment.  With proper notice, that time is reduced even further.

Tara also offers some hope: “This does not mean that it is impossible to overturn a judgment after it has been entered in every circumstance.  There are certainly situations in which a judgment was improperly taken.  Some examples include an action taken without proper service; brought in the wrong jurisdiction; and entered against active military personnel.”

For those individuals who truly were unaware of the pending litigation against them, there may be a remedy.  But it is not sufficient to ignore the problem then ask the court for forgiveness once the reality of the repercussions sets in.

For more information visit Tara Burd’s Who Is Page here in the Journal

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney
You may contact her at her office
T.Burd Law Group
945 Fourth Ave., #307
San Diego, CA 92101
Or by telephone 858-215-2873

Tara Burd

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Litigation Attorney Reminds Us That Running Your Mouth Off Isn’t Hearsay

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Litigation Attorney says, “What you say matters. Most people seem to agree that statements made online or at happy hour may constitute an enforceable contract. But many people believe the statements they made on Twitter, Facebook or to their buddy over drinks are not admissible in court and can’t be used against them. This is so wrong.”

Hearsay is a complex legal term that easily consumes a month of law school education in evidence. Nevertheless, its prevalence leads many individuals to wonder what it really means. Below is a brief explanation along with examples that demonstrate why people should stop chalking up their comments to “hearsay.”

Hearsay is an out-of-court statement made in court for the truth of the matter asserted. First, this means that out-of-court statements may be admitted in situations in which the truth of the statement does not matter.

Example #1: A man runs into police department with a gun and shouts, “I have a gun, I am going to kill everyone.” Before he gets a chance to pull the trigger, an officer shoots him. It turns out that the gun was not loaded and the man had no intention to kill everyone.  Is his statement hearsay? No.

In this case, it is irrelevant that the man’s gun was not loaded and that he wasn’t going to kill anyone.  The judge and jury don’t care whether the man’s words were true. What matters is that the effect of the man’s words upon the police officers led them to believe their lives were in danger. Since the truth doesn’t matter, this statement is NOT hearsay and is admissible.

The purpose behind the hearsay rule is to ensure that evidence presented in court is truthful and reliable. In other words, hearsay is presumed unreliable. The exceptions to hearsay generally apply to situations in which common sense dictates that the statement is most likely reliable. “Hearsay exceptions largely rely on the public’s beliefs as to the truthfulness of people. It is an example of our society’s role in crafting legal doctrine,” says Ms. Burd.

Example #2: A man sells his car washing business and promises not to compete within one year. The buyer agrees to make monthly installment payments. Six months later, the seller posts on Facebook, “I’m excited to announce I’m opening a brand new car wash, two blocks from the old location!” The buyer stops making payments and claims a breach of the Sales Agreement.  Is the seller’s Facebook statement admissible in court? Yes.

Here, the truth of the statement matters. This is hearsay if raised in court and used to prove that the seller breached the Sales Agreement. But, it meets an exception because it is considered a statement against interest.  As discussed above, the law assumes that a person would not make a statement falsely if that statement is harmful to him or herself. For that reason, this statement could be used against the speaker as evidence in court even if he didn’t really mean it.

These are just two of many examples of statements that can be used in court. The important take-away is not to assume that anything is hearsay. As Ms. Burd said, “Assume that what you say matters.”
For more information visit Tara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney’s “Who Is Page” in the San Diego Professional Journal.
or her Web Site

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney
You may contact her at her office
T.Burd Law Group
945 Fourth Ave., #307
San Diego, CA 92101
Or by telephone 858-215-2873

Tara Burd

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney | Advanced Health Care Directives are for All Ages and the Invincibles

See My Who Is  Tara Burd San Diego civil law attorney says “Estate planning is not for the dead or dying – it’s for the living.”

Its purpose is for an individual to express his or her wishes so that they can be carried out when that individual is unable to do so.  Too many people fail to place value in preparation. Too many people must think they are invincible and that accidents “don’t happen to people like them.”  These are such obvious fallacies, yet they are rampant in our society. If they weren’t – everyone would have an estate plan.  This article is for the 20-somethings and 30-somethings and 40 plus-somethings who believe that they’re “too young” to plan. It’s for the invincibles.

The Advanced Health Care Directive is a plan necessary for individuals of all ages.  It is the document where one dictates the person in his or her life they trust the most to make decisions relative to his or her health care. In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, the Terri Schiavo case was well-known. Ms. Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years.  Her husband wanted to remove her feeding tubes that were keeping her alive.  Her parents wanted to leave it in place.  Ms. Schiavo did not have an Advanced Health Care Directive.  She left no indication of whose medical opinion she valued most.  She left no instruction about what she wanted.  If she had an Advanced Health Care Directive, she likely would have identified either her husband or her parents as the decision-maker. There would have been no need for a 15 year battle. Ms. Schiavo was only 26 when she took ill.

In addition to designating a person to carry out one’s wishes, an Advanced Health Care Directive allows an individual to articulate his or her specific desires.  For example, it allows each individual to express whether he or she wants to be medically treated for an illness contracted while in a coma. It also allows individuals to decide whether it is more important for that person to be kept pain-free or life-support free when given the choice.

The Advanced Health Care Directive can be written to only take effect when an individual lacks capacity. Capacity is typically decided by either a court order or doctor’s declaration. It can also be written to take effect immediately. Even a person who has capacity may not want the pressures of making important health care decisions when he or she doesn’t feel strong and clear-headed. Designating a trusted person can lighten the burden of an painful, uncomfortable experience.

The time to prepare an Advanced Health Care Directive is as soon as possible. Planning is not about expecting death. It is about the living.

For more information visit Tara Burd’s Who Is Page here in the Journal
See the article in Small Business Trendsetters

Or either article in CNN iReport   or

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney
You may contact her at her office
T.Burd Law Group
945 Fourth Ave., #307
San Diego, CA 92101
Or by telephone 858-215-2873

Tara Burd

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney Clarifies The Confusion About Severance Agreements

See My Who IsTara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney reminds everybody “Once an employee waives his or her claims in exchange for payment, the waiver cannot typically be undone. It is not enough for an employee to say ‘I didn’t know’, especially when the severance agreement specifically suggests for the employee to consult an attorney.”

Getting fired can be scary. Even scarier is that 2-5 page agreement the employer hands to its employee saying “sign this if you want us to pay you a severance.” Sometimes the employer will even throw in a deadline: “You have 24 hours to agree to this or else.”

The answer to the question as to sign or not: Sometimes.

A severance agreement is a new contract between an employee and soon-to-be-past employer. Typically, the employer offers to pay the employee money in exchange for a waiver of any and all future claims against the employer. In some cases, severance agreements are given to an employee in appreciation for past performance. More often, however, it is merely a means to induce the employee into waiving his or her rights.

The language of the severance agreement can range from simple to verbose, but the message is always the same: “you waive the right to bring any and all claims against your employer.” In California, Civil Code section 1542 provides that a general release does not extend to claims that are not known about. So, naturally, severance agreements also contain a waiver of Civil Code section 1542. Essentially, by signing the severance agreement, the employee can never bring or aid in bringing any claims against his or her employer in the future, whether known or unknown.

For some employees, this is not a problem because they don’t have any viable legal claims against their employer. No discrimination, no retaliation, no unpaid overtime. For other employees, who are concerned they may have been improperly terminated, waiving their rights is a huge dilemma.

The way to handle this is to speak to an attorney who can assess the value of the potential claim. Attorneys will review an employee’s severance agreement and assess their potential claims for a flat fee. Understanding the potential claim may give the employee leverage to request a larger severance pay. Alternatively, the employee may wish to reject the severance in order to pursue a higher value claim.

Signing a severance agreement that states the employee has received any and all wages, does not waive the employee’s right to request unemployment insurance. Similarly, if the employer decides to contest the unemployment insurance claim, the severance agreement does not prohibit the employee from appealing the denial. A severance agreement cannot waive an individual’s statutory right to unemployment insurance, no matter what the contract says.

Turning down money-in-the-hand is difficult, but the decision to waive one’s legal rights should never be made lightly. However, once an employee is informed about what is waived by signing the severance agreement, he or she can – and should – do so confidently.
For more information visit Tara Burd’s Who Is Page here in the Journal

Tara Burd San Diego Civil Law Attorney
You may contact her at her office
T.Burd Law Group
945 Fourth Ave., #307
San Diego, CA 92101
Or by telephone 858-215-2873

Tara Burd

Tara Burd San Diego Contract Litigation Attorney | Partnerships and Taking Control of Your Business

See My Who Is Tara Burd San Diego contract litigation attorney says, “The law imposes duties upon people who are doing business together. So, take control of your business, no matter how small.”

Just like doctors make the worst patients, the most savvy, educated business-minded people often make the worst business decisions. A salesperson may excel at selling, but completely fail to protect his own business interests among his partners. Tara Burd, identified these five important, and often ignored, facts about partnerships:

1) You do not need to intend to create a partnership. That’s right, if two or more people are doing business together, they are in a default partnership whether they like it or not. Cal. Corp. Code § 16202.

2) You can be held liable for acts of your partner even if you did not agree to the act. There is no default rule that the act of one partner requires consent of the remaining partners. This means that your partner can go right ahead and enter into binding agreements with third-parties without telling you, and you can be held liable. To protect yourself, draft a partnership agreement that outlines the authority of its members. Cal. Corp. Code §§ 16301 and 16305.

3) Partners are jointly and severally liable for all liabilities of the partnership. Some people wrongly believe that if they are not making big decisions for the partnership, they will not be held liable for the debts of the partnerships. But, not only will you be liable as a partner, your private, individual assets – such as your home – are also up for grabs by a partnership’s creditors. If you want to protect yourself from liability, you need a partnership agreement in which all members agree to the limitation. You may even need a limited liability partnership instead. Cal. Corp. Code § 16306.

4) Each partner is entitled to an equal share of the profits and losses. Contributing 75% of the partnership’s startup capital does not entitle you to 75% of the partnership’s profits. “The law understands sweat equity,” says Tara Burd. Sweat equity is the time and labor that it takes to run a profitable business – it’s not all about the money. If your partners agree that your 75% contribution should entitle you to 75% of the profits and losses, put it in writing! Cal. Corp. Code § 16401(b).

5) Partners cannot participate in businesses that compete with the partnership. Partners have duties of loyalty and care to the partnership. If you are in a partnership that runs a photography business, you may be breaching your duty of loyalty if you accept a photography gig without contributing those profits to the partnership. But what if you also work as an independent contractor for another company on the side? To avoid any potential conflict, this type of scenario should be laid out in a partnership agreement. Cal. Corp. Code § 16404.

You and your partners can control profits, responsibilities, and liabilities. Planning your business now, saves your business later.

You can see more about Tara Burd on her web site

or on The Small Business Trendsetters site

On CNN iReport
Or the T. Burd Law Group
4452 Park Blvd., Suite 310
San Diego, CA 92116

head shot

Steven Lehat Attorney Business Advocate | Incubation Teaches Critical Skills

Steven Lehat Attorney Business Advocate says “A young attorney in a large firm is not going to be charged with important economic decisions in his or her early career. Everything will be decided for them. They are not going to have the basis for getting to sophisticated issues”

It will be very senior management making those decisions.

The folks at the bottom are being trained to create excellent work products. The problem is that those folks at the bottom, because of the level of clients in those particular companies, who are being charged so much (even though they may have the wherewithal to pay) many of them won’t even entertain having junior attorneys work on their matter. They simply don’t believe junior attorneys have that level of capability to practice because they’re viewed as inexperienced.

They are not making any tough decisions. Indeed, they are very smart and did go to wonderful schools.

But they are far from what somebody who goes out on their own and particularly someone who is incubated is going to have to address and have to get training in.

This latter category of attorneys may or may not have the inherent abilities of somebody who is recruited by one of the elite firms from one of the elite schools. But those attorneys are going to do things much sooner and they are required by the laws of ethics to attain competency.

They can’t just go out there, just out of law school and because they are adventurous enough to put out their shingle to take a case without studying the law. They must make themselves competent and if necessary, bring in more competent senior people to work on a given project. Those attorneys are going to the head of the curve in the initial years. There’s no question about that in terms of returning value for services. Later on of course, these other attorneys, in the large firms, who have been nurtured over a long period of time can grow to be great attorneys and great business-minded attorneys, but it’s a process.

We’re dealing with the constituency that is going to be the vast majority of graduating attorneys in this country. For them, these skills are critical to really fulfill their destinies as successful practicing attorneys. They will take the best that the profession has to give in the world of ethics and impart it and join it to the best that business models can give to turn out a work product that ultimately clients are going to really love.

Their success will be based on setting up and running a best practices law office. Mr. Lehat tells us “In today’s day and age, the lawyer would need to be familiar with the very concept that regular businesses know all about; things such as project management, CRM, sales, internet web-sites and social networking. The new lawyer also must know the best way to make use of a given piece of equipment, what equipment to buy, and what equipment is going to be particularly cost effective or any particular set of clientele in order to give their client the best product at the best price.”

You can see more about Steven Lehat by visiting http://www.
Or on CNN
Or in the offices of
Law Business World Inc.
895 Dove Street third floor
Newport Beach, CA 92660

Sandra Mayberry

Sandra Mayberry San Diego Family Law | Divorce May Be Inevitable But It Need Not Be Destructive

Sandra Mayberry San Diego Family Law says “If you just think you may be getting a divorce you need a support system. You will need help to gather documents and to get good advice on whether you need to act right away to protect your assets.”

A Family Law Attorney should be an integral part of any support system. The three most important things to look for when choosing the attorney that is right for you are;

• A personality that fits with yours. This can only be found in meeting with them or by getting a good referral from a friend who knows you well.
• The attorney must be honest and provides easy to understand information. This begins with how their staff responds to your initial contact
• You want an attorney who is experienced and has a good reputation. Look online for State Bar certifications and organizations to which the person belongs. Websites like Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers are good because these website reviews are by other lawyers who are assessing that lawyer.

Sandra tells us “The most often asked questions are; ‘can I afford it/how much will it cost?’, ‘What am I entitled to receive in property and/or support?’ “

Determining the cost of the divorce requires an assessment of your income/expenses by a good lawyer and possibly a financial person to look at your budget. Not hiring a lawyer can end up costing you more if you don’t understand the law.

California is a community property state. This means a couple is splitting all the assets/obligations acquired during their marriage unless from an inheritance or gift during the marriage.

Defining a budget is absolutely necessary because you will have almost half the income you have had in the past if you are separating households.

You should store/remove anything that could be damaged and which you cannot replace.

Divorce is a difficult emotional process for even the best people. Always make certain your spouse is aware of the divorce. Do not surprise them so they come home one day to an empty shelf.

Divorce is extremely difficult for children, even with two very amicable parents. Check in with a good child psychologist ; you don’t need to take your children to one unless it’s immediately needed for them.

You may find more about Sandra Mayberry by visiting

CNN iReport

You may also visit the Law Office of Sandra L. Mayberry
8325 University Avenue
La Mesa, CA 91942
Or call 619.312.6597

Unknown Male Professional

San Diego Patent Attorney Peter Gutenberg Warns Inventors About Trolls and Offers Tips for Selecting a Patent Lawyer

Patents on intellectual material is one of the most misunderstood facets of the law. One of the biggest problems currently facing inventors and the judicial system are “patent trolls”.  Patent attorney Peter Gutenberg, owner of the Law Offices of Peter Gutenberg, specializes in patent law and is a leading authority on patent trolls.

“So-called “patent trolls” or patent assertion entities get a lot of press,” said Gutenberg. “Generally, these are firms which buy up patients and assert them against infringers or license them to users. The bad reputation of these people is that they pay the inventors a relatively small sum for the patent rights and reap huge rewards after litigation. They clog up the court system with patent-related litigation.”

A patent troll can be an individual or entity. In many instances the buyer never actively markets the product or method developed by the creator. The inventor’s vision of making millions evaporates and they come to Gutenberg for answers, while the patent troll’s income soars by suing others for infringement, slowing down the court system in the process.

Universities are one of the entities that routinely purchase patents, with the University of California system one of the largest holders of patents in the U.S. Inventors should be aware that they don’t have to sell their patent outright. Licensing is also an option. To avoid patent trolls and theft, Gutenberg advises, “If you have invented something, don’t make and sell it and don’t disclose it.”

In many instances, a patent troll may represent the only offer an inventor receives. There are millions of patents on file that have never been monetarily successful for their creator.  Many individuals fear the cost of hiring a professional and fail to seek the expertise that only an experienced patent lawyer can provide.

Obtaining a patent isn’t a simple procedure and inventors should be aware that it doesn’t automatically confer monetary rewards. A patent can be a costly and time consuming endeavor, depending upon the complexity of the patent and the amount of research that must be conducted. The patent application can take 40 to 50 hours to write and the average patent takes 3-5 years to obtain.

Prior to changes in the law, an individual had to prove that they were the first to invent or discover something to be granted a patent. Today, the first person to file for a patent will be recognized as the holder. A patent, and the invention or concept it protects, is essentially a piece of property and is treated as such by the law.

Gutenberg advises inventors to educate themselves about the patent process by visiting the patent office website before retaining legal counsel. They should seek an attorney that will explain the costs and process beforehand, select someone they feel comfortable working with, and someone with the appropriate education, diligence and attention to detail.

Patent Attorney Peter Gutenberg can be reached through his office at 10606 Camino Ruiz Suite 8 #263, San Diego, CA 92126.  More information may be found on Mr. Gutenberg’s Web Site

Other information about Patent Attorney Peter Gutenberg can be seen on CNN at

And in Press Releases at

Unknown Male Professional

San Diego Attorney Jason Feldman and The Major Misconception About Immigration Law Today

Jason Feldman, a prominent San Diego immigration attorney, says, “The misconception is that immigration Iaw is primarily about helping illegal immigrants. Not true”.  Although illegal immigrants and immigration reform are receiving most of the headlines, the majority of immigration law clients entered the United States legally and wants to live and work here legally.

Immigration lawyers spend a huge proportion of their time representing employers who want to hire foreign nationals, individuals who want to invest in the United States and start businesses here, those who want to marry a foreigner and those with other immigration-related matters.

It is true that illegal immigration has become the elephant in the room. “Reform” covers what to do with all the illegal immigrants who are here already, the limits on skilled workers and the per country limits.  Public discussions of illegal immigration produce many opinions pro and con.

On the “pro” side, the often-mentioned facts that illegal immigrants do many of the jobs Americans don’t want to do. They keep the price of our goods and services low. They also help keep Social Security afloat because many of them pay into the system using fake identification numbers and have no way to collect on their payments.

Limiting the entry of skilled workers does not make sense as these workers all have at least a Bachelor’s Degree and contribute positively to our society. They are typically health care professionals and software developers, areas where the U. S. has significant shortages. If an employer wants to hire skilled foreign workers, application must be made six months in advance. The cost will be in the thousands of dollars with no guarantee the employer will be matched with a worker.

On the “Con” side, illegal immigrants have violated the law. They lower wages for the Americans who would do those same jobs.

When asked what he feels will happen when all the arguments for and against play out, Attorney Jason Feldman said, in an interview with the San Diego Professional Journal, “I think something positive will come out of it (Immigration Reform) by allowing more skilled workers and reducing the time frame from application to hiring. It also makes sense that those here illegally start to pay taxes”.

There should not be restrictions on skilled workers and certainly none on workers with a Master’s Degree or higher. If companies in the United States can’t get the workers they need, they open overseas offices and other countries than the United States get the economic benefits. As one example of this, Bill Gates testified before Congress that he couldn’t get the skilled workers he needed. Congress didn’t listen so Gates opened an office in Canada and hired the workers he needed there.

Many companies have started to outsource to India and other places because there are not enough U.S. visas available for the workers they need. If companies could bring the foreign nationals into the U.S., the money would stay in the United States and benefit the economy.

There has been support along these same lines from the American Immigration Lawyers Association and from Cyrus Mehta, founder of another prestigious law firm active in the immigration field.

Where do you suppose all this will end? Or will it?

Jason Feldman’s law office, Feldman Feldman and Associates is located at 2221 Camino Del Rio South #201, San Diego, CA 92108, phone 619-299-9600.

American Immigration Lawyers Association can be seen

Cyrus Mehta of the New York law firm Cyrus D Mehta & Associates views can be seen

See other articles about Mr. Feldman at  CNN and in Press Releases by PRBuzz