JEESEE
05-11 12:06 PM
My Wife wanted to join a school for some course. We decided to apply for FAFSA to pay for School fees. I am not sure whether she is eligible to apply for FAFSA or not.
Can some Guru shed some lights on this?
By the way, she is on H4 but we have our EAD. She has not started using her EAD as of yet.
Can some Guru shed some lights on this?
By the way, she is on H4 but we have our EAD. She has not started using her EAD as of yet.
wallpaper kawaii-nail-art-2
venky321
07-19 02:08 PM
It might have been okay if you had tried to transfer from H1 to H4 after a few months of being on the bench; but 3 years out of status lol.
Talk to an attorney, file a DOL complaint against your employer; but if it comes out that you were out of status for 3 years, I think your chances are pretty bleak.
Talk to an attorney, file a DOL complaint against your employer; but if it comes out that you were out of status for 3 years, I think your chances are pretty bleak.
immiguy
07-18 04:06 PM
ok- so , I am guessing the consensus is go with the earlier PD (+ EB3).
Also, is the SKILL bill is for people with higher ed from the US- both of us qualify for that as we both comepleted our MS in the US.
Also, is the SKILL bill is for people with higher ed from the US- both of us qualify for that as we both comepleted our MS in the US.
2011 3d hello kitty nail art.
ramboom1
03-28 09:20 AM
Fellow IV members,
How come the "Hard Limit" is not talked about / mentioned in any of the big websites? Shusterman.com / Aila.org et all. Is it possible to get an immigration attorney to explain this crucial issue of "Hard Limit" to IV core team ?
How come the "Hard Limit" is not talked about / mentioned in any of the big websites? Shusterman.com / Aila.org et all. Is it possible to get an immigration attorney to explain this crucial issue of "Hard Limit" to IV core team ?
more...
miceelf88
10-09 05:22 PM
somehow double posted. My apologies
lskreddy
01-13 04:23 PM
it won't correct, as this practice has been long stopped. You may be in trouble for sure.
I disagree. When what you are requesting is what they should have followed in the first place, why do you back out? Damn, it seems like they screw up and we cover for their screw ups. Ask them to correct their mistake and give your 11/04 PD. If your lawyer won't, then hire another capable one..
I disagree. When what you are requesting is what they should have followed in the first place, why do you back out? Damn, it seems like they screw up and we cover for their screw ups. Ask them to correct their mistake and give your 11/04 PD. If your lawyer won't, then hire another capable one..
more...
mallu
02-07 01:25 AM
Hi,
I am on H1B visa. My parents due to a medical condition cannot take care of themselves. They need someone to be present with them 24 hrs a day. Can I get them on H4 visa as dependent? I would like to keep them for 2-3 years in US and take care of them. Please let me know my options.
Thanks in advance.
CG
Parents are not considered dependents . So i am not sure they can come on H4 visa. I can understand the situation ( being the only son of my parents with deteriorating health ). Once in a while i think of getting rid of this stay in USA and heading back home and caring for the ones who raised me to adult hood.
There may be more avenues , let more knowledgeable people in this forum comment.
I am on H1B visa. My parents due to a medical condition cannot take care of themselves. They need someone to be present with them 24 hrs a day. Can I get them on H4 visa as dependent? I would like to keep them for 2-3 years in US and take care of them. Please let me know my options.
Thanks in advance.
CG
Parents are not considered dependents . So i am not sure they can come on H4 visa. I can understand the situation ( being the only son of my parents with deteriorating health ). Once in a while i think of getting rid of this stay in USA and heading back home and caring for the ones who raised me to adult hood.
There may be more avenues , let more knowledgeable people in this forum comment.
2010 Super hip Hello Kitty style
a_yaja
07-25 05:26 PM
Thanks for the reply. It says on the document itself that the petitioner should keep the upper portion of the notice and give the lower portion to the worker.
Does anyone know the procedure to get the duplicate and how long it takes?
I just took a look at my 797A and you are correct - it says that the petitioner can keep the above portion. Sorry for my remarks about the employer.
However, all my employers have always given me the entire document and they have kept only a copy with them.
Does anyone know the procedure to get the duplicate and how long it takes?
I just took a look at my 797A and you are correct - it says that the petitioner can keep the above portion. Sorry for my remarks about the employer.
However, all my employers have always given me the entire document and they have kept only a copy with them.
more...
gccovet
06-29 02:45 AM
For folks who are past the 180 day period:-
When negotiating a new job offer, what does one have verify with HR of the new company specifically with regard to AC 21 portability? :confused:
Most recruiters / HR folks know nothing about AC21 etc. (Most when they hear green card, say per company policy, they will start haver 1 yr!).
Should one ever bother about confusing the new employer about AC21? (Assume that Job titiles and descriptions are practically the same. Nothing drastically different. And taking the new job on H1b transfer. i.e. not on EAD).
(PS: I am not taking from the context of desi consulting firms where it might be easier to get any letter with exact same job description etc.).
I would just check if HR would be willing to provide a letter addressed to USCIS on their letterhead stating about new job title and job duties. Even if you send the letter right after joining or when you (might) get a RFE.
GCCovet
When negotiating a new job offer, what does one have verify with HR of the new company specifically with regard to AC 21 portability? :confused:
Most recruiters / HR folks know nothing about AC21 etc. (Most when they hear green card, say per company policy, they will start haver 1 yr!).
Should one ever bother about confusing the new employer about AC21? (Assume that Job titiles and descriptions are practically the same. Nothing drastically different. And taking the new job on H1b transfer. i.e. not on EAD).
(PS: I am not taking from the context of desi consulting firms where it might be easier to get any letter with exact same job description etc.).
I would just check if HR would be willing to provide a letter addressed to USCIS on their letterhead stating about new job title and job duties. Even if you send the letter right after joining or when you (might) get a RFE.
GCCovet
hair Japanese nail art
glus
08-10 09:49 AM
Hi,
I filed for I-485 in July 2007. At that time I had an out-of-status issue. I had discussed the option of going out of the country and re-enter(to have a clean slate) before filing with my lawyer, she suggested going to Canada was more riskier.
There was a delay in switching from L1 to H1B after H1B and a change of status was approved in Oct 2005. I switched to my H1B employer only on April 1st 2006. So probably was out of status for 182 days.
Is it a given that USCIS will find this issue?
I was reading about the 245(k) memo, that USCIS can forgive up to 180 days of 'out of status' since the last lawful entry.
I haven't gone out of the country since Jan 2005. So still had 182 days of 'out of status' when the 485 was filed.
I'm planning a trip outside of the country by end of October. My question is that, will my re-entry (using H1-B) and subsequent stay in correct status be good enough for 245(k) ?
Will my previous 182 days of 'out of status' will be erased and overlooked for 485 purposes?.
Or did I have to have a clean status at the time when 485 was filed? Re-entry and maintaining status after filing 485 does not count ??
Greatly Appreciate any reply.
Thanks!
245(k) can be used to adjust status if a person failed to maintain non-immigrant status for fewer than 181 DAYS since the LAST entry until 485 was FILED Re-entering and maintaining status after 485 was filed can not help currently pending 485. If a person was out of status for more than 180 days, the underlying 485 can't be approved, IF USCIS NOTICES this. ...The odds are USCIS will not notice this. Another way of going about this problem, would be to re-file 485 after re-entering U.S. on a dual intent visa and maintaining the status when your PD is current again. Such 485 would be then approvable. Hope this makes any sense.
I filed for I-485 in July 2007. At that time I had an out-of-status issue. I had discussed the option of going out of the country and re-enter(to have a clean slate) before filing with my lawyer, she suggested going to Canada was more riskier.
There was a delay in switching from L1 to H1B after H1B and a change of status was approved in Oct 2005. I switched to my H1B employer only on April 1st 2006. So probably was out of status for 182 days.
Is it a given that USCIS will find this issue?
I was reading about the 245(k) memo, that USCIS can forgive up to 180 days of 'out of status' since the last lawful entry.
I haven't gone out of the country since Jan 2005. So still had 182 days of 'out of status' when the 485 was filed.
I'm planning a trip outside of the country by end of October. My question is that, will my re-entry (using H1-B) and subsequent stay in correct status be good enough for 245(k) ?
Will my previous 182 days of 'out of status' will be erased and overlooked for 485 purposes?.
Or did I have to have a clean status at the time when 485 was filed? Re-entry and maintaining status after filing 485 does not count ??
Greatly Appreciate any reply.
Thanks!
245(k) can be used to adjust status if a person failed to maintain non-immigrant status for fewer than 181 DAYS since the LAST entry until 485 was FILED Re-entering and maintaining status after 485 was filed can not help currently pending 485. If a person was out of status for more than 180 days, the underlying 485 can't be approved, IF USCIS NOTICES this. ...The odds are USCIS will not notice this. Another way of going about this problem, would be to re-file 485 after re-entering U.S. on a dual intent visa and maintaining the status when your PD is current again. Such 485 would be then approvable. Hope this makes any sense.
more...
aj1234567
07-17 06:36 PM
This is great news!!We proved once again that if we are united we can win always!!
hot Hello Kitty 3D Nail Art
boreal
09-22 03:59 PM
Hi PCS,
I would appreciate if you confirm if the notarized experience letter is accepted as substitute for the original experience letter. I am planning use a preapproved labor but the job requirement for that labor requires some specific skills. My old employer would not give me the letter. So can I ask my colleague to send me a notarized experience letter ?
Thanks,
pcbadgujar
Oh God!! People can and will do anything to abuse Labor Substibution.
I would appreciate if you confirm if the notarized experience letter is accepted as substitute for the original experience letter. I am planning use a preapproved labor but the job requirement for that labor requires some specific skills. My old employer would not give me the letter. So can I ask my colleague to send me a notarized experience letter ?
Thanks,
pcbadgujar
Oh God!! People can and will do anything to abuse Labor Substibution.
more...
house Tag Archives: 3d nail art
FredG
July 18th, 2004, 07:54 AM
What an interesting plant! I like the second one better, as it isolates one plant and you can see that all the parts really do belong to just that one. DOF must have been quite a challenge.
tattoo ★Kawaii Japanese Nail Art
franklin
05-31 10:46 AM
Great news!
But to answer the question posed - how do we get more of the affected retrogressed people involved. I suspect it will take "casting a wider net" and getting people from different countries.
But to answer the question posed - how do we get more of the affected retrogressed people involved. I suspect it will take "casting a wider net" and getting people from different countries.
more...
pictures Cupid-themed nails for nail
gemini23
11-21 10:30 AM
the above scenario was if you were mnaintaing H1 status. if you are working using EAD then ofcourse your current status wont be H1 bur AOS hence you will send proof of that.
The idea is to show that you are here legally and if working prrof of that authorization thorough a visa or EAD.
Thanks waitingforlong. And the proof of AOS would be 485 receipts right?
The idea is to show that you are here legally and if working prrof of that authorization thorough a visa or EAD.
Thanks waitingforlong. And the proof of AOS would be 485 receipts right?
dresses Hello Kitty Acrylic Nails
kc_p21
06-15 09:43 PM
Hello :
My EAD expires on July 28, 2010. I have sent the application today with request to expedite with employer letter.
If I don't receive my new EAD card by July 28, 2010, then
1) Will/Should I stop working?
2) If I do stop working, what impact will that have on my pending I-485? Am I not OUT-OF-STATUS if I don't have a valid EAD?
3) If I continue to work, what impact will that have on my pending I-485? Am I not OUT-OF-STATUS if I don't have a valid EAD?
4) Can I continue to work/remain IN-STATUS as long as my EAD application shows "Approved" on USCIS website but I don't have the physical card with me?
Any response to these questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks!
My EAD expires on July 28, 2010. I have sent the application today with request to expedite with employer letter.
If I don't receive my new EAD card by July 28, 2010, then
1) Will/Should I stop working?
2) If I do stop working, what impact will that have on my pending I-485? Am I not OUT-OF-STATUS if I don't have a valid EAD?
3) If I continue to work, what impact will that have on my pending I-485? Am I not OUT-OF-STATUS if I don't have a valid EAD?
4) Can I continue to work/remain IN-STATUS as long as my EAD application shows "Approved" on USCIS website but I don't have the physical card with me?
Any response to these questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks!
more...
makeup hello kitty 3D nail art - by
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.
girlfriend HELLO KITTY Nails pink bows 3d
Leo07
05-21 10:20 AM
and there are lots more like us...
hairstyles 3d hello kitty designs,
factoryman
06-18 01:08 PM
I doubt it. As far as I know only HIV from the blood drawn. I will look into the copies the doctor gave me.
All
First of all, sorry to open a new thread for my problem, but didn't find a related thread.
I was tested positive for genetal herpes 6months ago, but after that i didn't have any outbreaks. Now i have to go for medicals for my I485 next week.
Iam very much worried if it will effect my chances of getting GC.
Should i let the civil surgeon know iam positive for herpes and show my medical reports before he does the blood work, or should i wait till he finishes my blood work? I have read that i can apply for a waiver even if im tested positive for herpes, is it true? If so, can any body please tell me what is the procedure? Do i need to do it when we are filing for 485, or is it a separate process?
Please guide me.
Thanks in advance.
All
First of all, sorry to open a new thread for my problem, but didn't find a related thread.
I was tested positive for genetal herpes 6months ago, but after that i didn't have any outbreaks. Now i have to go for medicals for my I485 next week.
Iam very much worried if it will effect my chances of getting GC.
Should i let the civil surgeon know iam positive for herpes and show my medical reports before he does the blood work, or should i wait till he finishes my blood work? I have read that i can apply for a waiver even if im tested positive for herpes, is it true? If so, can any body please tell me what is the procedure? Do i need to do it when we are filing for 485, or is it a separate process?
Please guide me.
Thanks in advance.
americandesi
05-19 02:34 PM
AC21 letter can be sent to USCIS, but as everyone says its not a must.
AC21 letter is a MUST if I-140 was revoked by the previous employer. There are cases where USCIS had mistakenly denied I-485's with revoked I-140's in spite of submitting AC21 papers.
In such situations, the only life saver in MTR (Motion to Re-appeal) is the proof of submitting AC21 papers on time.
AC21 letter is a MUST if I-140 was revoked by the previous employer. There are cases where USCIS had mistakenly denied I-485's with revoked I-140's in spite of submitting AC21 papers.
In such situations, the only life saver in MTR (Motion to Re-appeal) is the proof of submitting AC21 papers on time.
optimystic
11-04 07:32 PM
From 1998 - till date, How many times EB3 priority dates were made current
Since nobody attempted to answer your question, let me give a try.
The answer depends on what is the EB3-PD ? If someone (like me) had a PD of 2001 , then it would have become current more than a couple of times. Just in the last two years my PD became current thrice (including July Fiasco), and am still waiting for my approval.
But if you are asking how many times did EVERYONE became current, then possibly only once (The July '07 fiasco). I can tell this for sure since 2000. I am not aware of any info before that year.
Since nobody attempted to answer your question, let me give a try.
The answer depends on what is the EB3-PD ? If someone (like me) had a PD of 2001 , then it would have become current more than a couple of times. Just in the last two years my PD became current thrice (including July Fiasco), and am still waiting for my approval.
But if you are asking how many times did EVERYONE became current, then possibly only once (The July '07 fiasco). I can tell this for sure since 2000. I am not aware of any info before that year.
No comments:
Post a Comment