ksvreg
09-25 11:16 AM
My H1B expired in April 2008. My company is not willing to extend H1B any more due to the reason that I got EAD and I-140 approved and pending 485. Is it possible to get H1B extension from current or future company based on approved I-140? Or Is it too late?
You might wondering why do I need H1B now. I am not sure why I need H1B. Some of my friends who had trouble in their I-140/485 were able to survive with H1B. So, it looks like it is better to have dual. H1B and EAD.
Please advise.
You might wondering why do I need H1B now. I am not sure why I need H1B. Some of my friends who had trouble in their I-140/485 were able to survive with H1B. So, it looks like it is better to have dual. H1B and EAD.
Please advise.
wallpaper 2010 Honda Civic Hybrid
vishage
07-18 11:03 AM
I have e filed on 7/2, there was soft lud today, do you have a soft lud when ur FP notice is mailed? has anyone seen the same??thanks for your reply
stones
06-30 11:31 PM
have you been employed by Company B? If so, for what dates do you have paystubs?
I have paystubs from November, 2008 to June, 2009
I have paystubs from November, 2008 to June, 2009
2011 I think i remember this civic
vensun
05-19 04:27 PM
I know it is basic question, but after reading the thread just got dought.
I am planning to use AC21 soon, if my employer revokes I 140, is that going to effect my case?
My details:-
Worked employer for 4 years
Labour substitution 2.5 years back
I 140 approved 2 yrs back(06/2006)
I1485 filed in July 2007
Thanks,
Ven
I am planning to use AC21 soon, if my employer revokes I 140, is that going to effect my case?
My details:-
Worked employer for 4 years
Labour substitution 2.5 years back
I 140 approved 2 yrs back(06/2006)
I1485 filed in July 2007
Thanks,
Ven
more...
immiusa
06-17 12:04 PM
Do not worry. Your mail will be delivered eventually. You probably need to wait for couple of days before the system gets updated with good message "delivered".
In my case, I had to wait for 4 days. I was expecting a return packet at my door. Four days later, I realized the packet was actually delivered to USCIS.
In my case, I had to wait for 4 days. I was expecting a return packet at my door. Four days later, I realized the packet was actually delivered to USCIS.
yestogc
03-06 01:34 AM
In India, as of this day only Rs 1L is secured if a bank fails ............... isn't that way too low.
http://www.dicgc.org.in/GuideToDepositInsuranceInIndia.htm#q3
http://www.dicgc.org.in/GuideToDepositInsuranceInIndia.htm#q3
more...
quizzer
11-09 02:37 PM
Recently I have got Denial notice from INS on my I-140 application. All the documents are fine. Just They have mentioned as My Education Qualification is not equivalent to US Education. My Education is B.Sc. Physics and MBA.
Is anybody has got same problem, and if yes Please let me know what to do in this situation.
I am thinking of getting good Education Evaluation from Somebody. But I don't know it�s just happened because of Lawyer. Do I need to go to smart , strong Attorney to do this. OR Apply for new labor again and start the process.
Please suggest me on this.
Thanks
Yogs.
Can you tell me ur dates:
I140 RD
RFE received date?
EB2 or EB3?
Service center?
Thanks
Is anybody has got same problem, and if yes Please let me know what to do in this situation.
I am thinking of getting good Education Evaluation from Somebody. But I don't know it�s just happened because of Lawyer. Do I need to go to smart , strong Attorney to do this. OR Apply for new labor again and start the process.
Please suggest me on this.
Thanks
Yogs.
Can you tell me ur dates:
I140 RD
RFE received date?
EB2 or EB3?
Service center?
Thanks
2010 2010 Honda Civic Si INTERIOR
anilsal
12-13 10:55 AM
Taking any action on 11+ million illegal aliens is no small job, It will take years.
more...
transpass
07-22 11:16 PM
You don't. Your employer files an I9, and there they mention your status. This is why they need to update using an I9 every time you get a H1 extension.
As far as I-9 form goes, it is my understanding that it is not filed with any agency. The form is retained by the employer only.
As far as I-9 form goes, it is my understanding that it is not filed with any agency. The form is retained by the employer only.
hair 2009 Honda Civic 5door and
prout02
07-30 12:26 PM
I have read in this forum frequent questions about this - legality/enforceability of noncompete clause. Here's a recent court decision from Kansas. It talks about physician practices. No idea if it is applicable to other professions. But the four factors cited in the decision seem relevant.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
more...
americandesi
03-13 05:34 PM
This is the danger with a "green card shop" company. They constantly have people joining and leaving them. Not a problem for H-1b but a major problem with GC processing.
Here is an example with company X which has ability pay for up to 50 employees at any point.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2005 [less than 50]
X applies 25 I-140s in 2006, and 20 of the 2005 count have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2007, and another 20 have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
One would think since they have less than 50 empoyees and ability to pay for 50 employees, they are safe. This will work for H-1b, but not for GCs.
Since GC is for future employment, the company is required to have the ability to pay all 85 employees after they become permanent residents. It does not matter if they have quit the company. The asumption is all 85 will be employed by X on GC approval and so X is expected to be able to pay all of them.
This is what has happened here. When such a problem comes up, then they can (and sometimes do) pull back previously approved 140s too.
Most employees who leave the GC sponsoring employer either invoke AC21 or port their PD�s with another employer. Hence the GC sponsoring employer could very well go ahead and withdraw their I-140�s so that they are no longer burdened to prove ATP for all ex-employees.
Here is an example with company X which has ability pay for up to 50 employees at any point.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2005 [less than 50]
X applies 25 I-140s in 2006, and 20 of the 2005 count have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2007, and another 20 have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
One would think since they have less than 50 empoyees and ability to pay for 50 employees, they are safe. This will work for H-1b, but not for GCs.
Since GC is for future employment, the company is required to have the ability to pay all 85 employees after they become permanent residents. It does not matter if they have quit the company. The asumption is all 85 will be employed by X on GC approval and so X is expected to be able to pay all of them.
This is what has happened here. When such a problem comes up, then they can (and sometimes do) pull back previously approved 140s too.
Most employees who leave the GC sponsoring employer either invoke AC21 or port their PD�s with another employer. Hence the GC sponsoring employer could very well go ahead and withdraw their I-140�s so that they are no longer burdened to prove ATP for all ex-employees.
hot 2010 Chevrolet Cruze, interior
ArkBird
03-15 11:17 AM
Didn't most of us came to US through "Desi Companies/Body Shopper/Outsourcer"?
Now that we are feeling the pinch, we want to close this door for the other folks?
Guys, this is pinnacle of hypocrisy. Please convince me how this is different from the Anti Immigrants??
Please note. I have no axe to grind and I have never worked for Desi Company/Body Shopper/Outsourcer.
Now that we are feeling the pinch, we want to close this door for the other folks?
Guys, this is pinnacle of hypocrisy. Please convince me how this is different from the Anti Immigrants??
Please note. I have no axe to grind and I have never worked for Desi Company/Body Shopper/Outsourcer.
more...
house 2009 Honda Civic LX-S
wa_Saiprasad
07-26 08:36 PM
My attorney didn't pay attention to my birth certificate. My birth was registered couple of days after later but the certificate was issued 4 years later in 1979. And my fathers, mothers and my names were not full name. My fathers name was spelt wrong. Anyways nothing can be done now my application went in on July 2nd. I am hoping it will be an RFE. My case is another classic case of Attorney negligence.
tattoo The Honda stall at
kirupa
08-18 11:48 PM
If you are lazy (like I am right now), you could just create an owl smiley and have the tag name by "O' RLY"! That way you won't have to fret about getting the owl's expression just right in the tiny < 20 pixel per side area!
more...
pictures 2012 honda civic si sedan
kshitijnt
03-07 12:49 AM
Hi People,
I have been hearing a few things on the renewal and I cant seem to get a concrete picture here. Would appreciate a look here.
I am applying for an advance parole renewal for my wife, me and her, we did not apply for the GC at the same time, I applied during the hullabaloo July 2007 times under the old fee structure and she was applied later on in the following year 2008 under the new fee structure of $1010 as a derivative under my application. Her I-797 receipt notice indicates that a fee of $1010 was paid out. My I-797 indicates $300 odd as separate fees.
Given the above, is she exempt from paying the $305/$340 for the Advance Parole/EAD. A USCIS agent that I talked to says that anything after July 30th 2007 is exempt but she could well be reading from a piece of paper without actual knowledge of the intricacies. A paralegal at my lawyer's office said that she needs to pay, but somehow I am not convinced.
Would appreciate a little insight here.
Thx,
M
She is exempt. I renewed last year under new fees structure. I got my AP . For this year they did not even give me a receipt. So I am going to have to call USCIS.
I have been hearing a few things on the renewal and I cant seem to get a concrete picture here. Would appreciate a look here.
I am applying for an advance parole renewal for my wife, me and her, we did not apply for the GC at the same time, I applied during the hullabaloo July 2007 times under the old fee structure and she was applied later on in the following year 2008 under the new fee structure of $1010 as a derivative under my application. Her I-797 receipt notice indicates that a fee of $1010 was paid out. My I-797 indicates $300 odd as separate fees.
Given the above, is she exempt from paying the $305/$340 for the Advance Parole/EAD. A USCIS agent that I talked to says that anything after July 30th 2007 is exempt but she could well be reading from a piece of paper without actual knowledge of the intricacies. A paralegal at my lawyer's office said that she needs to pay, but somehow I am not convinced.
Would appreciate a little insight here.
Thx,
M
She is exempt. I renewed last year under new fees structure. I got my AP . For this year they did not even give me a receipt. So I am going to have to call USCIS.
dresses 2010 Honda Civic Hybrid Audio
Raynstorm
08-09 05:37 AM
Hi David,
a bit of the record, but your link to the site reminds me a bit of this early '90ies computergame "Indiana Jones" (some adventure which was lots of fun back in the dayz). It was one of the puzzles.
Nice though!
Rayn
a bit of the record, but your link to the site reminds me a bit of this early '90ies computergame "Indiana Jones" (some adventure which was lots of fun back in the dayz). It was one of the puzzles.
Nice though!
Rayn
more...
makeup New Honda Civic 2010 Model
me_myself
03-05 03:06 AM
There is a sudden change of plan. My company wants me in US for two months - March 15 - May 15. Then i have to go back to India till Dec 09 and come back to join work from Jan 2010. My questions -
1. Will i be facing any questions at the immigration (point of entry) when i come back on Jan 2010?
2. Any other situation or scenario that i should be aware of?
3. If i receive pay check for just two months in 09, will there be a problem when i file taxes for 2009?
4. How long can i stay outside US on a H1b visa?
Thanks a lot.
1. Will i be facing any questions at the immigration (point of entry) when i come back on Jan 2010?
2. Any other situation or scenario that i should be aware of?
3. If i receive pay check for just two months in 09, will there be a problem when i file taxes for 2009?
4. How long can i stay outside US on a H1b visa?
Thanks a lot.
girlfriend Slideshow - 2010 Honda Civic
forgerator
03-22 01:17 PM
very sad. I hope they take swift action against the culprit and put her in jail.
hairstyles 2010 Honda Civic - Dashboard
gc_chahiye
02-11 01:28 AM
Also, there is no way that they can reduce the backlog if they end up waiting for the PDs to be current.
I think you missed the point: if no PD is current, then there are no backlogs.
If a case cannot be approved because it exceeds the regulatory requirements, it wont count as a backlogged case. It will sit there, gathering dust, but wont be counted in any of these stats...
I think you missed the point: if no PD is current, then there are no backlogs.
If a case cannot be approved because it exceeds the regulatory requirements, it wont count as a backlogged case. It will sit there, gathering dust, but wont be counted in any of these stats...
payur
09-07 02:17 PM
Actually my husband is primary for GC process.I am on H4 visa.How can he revoke I-140.My PD is may'03 and TSC
Oh..I see.
May be soon you will get your GC and then you can kick your employer:)
I am confused on how your H1B cancellation letter will impact your GC. If my understanding is correct your employer and your husband's employer are different, I don't see any relation. This is my guess and consulting an attorney will be the best.
Oh..I see.
May be soon you will get your GC and then you can kick your employer:)
I am confused on how your H1B cancellation letter will impact your GC. If my understanding is correct your employer and your husband's employer are different, I don't see any relation. This is my guess and consulting an attorney will be the best.
cvk90
06-23 10:31 PM
My attornies (big firm...working for Fortune 500 company) says that dates could retrogress anytime i.e. on 15 July 07, dates could move back several months and the chances of that happening are very high. My advise is to have your spouse cut the vacation short and return asap...! You need to file ASAP.
