tammigaw
02-15 02:14 AM
It says own/lease/solicit ...blah..blah with any competitors , but the language is very generic and now he says that there is a word in the text and it could be opened to any interpretation based on his convinience .
When i asked him to explain the clause during the time of signing he said that i could not join his competetors for this client . I felt this cluase is reasonable to protect on his business interests , so i sighned it .
Now he is manuplating it to accomodate his interested , so he can squeeze more money out of me .
During my stay here , he NEWER paid me on time andi had to call him 20 times and mail him for 10 times ..literaly begging to get my pay .
If in worst case , if he tries to execute this non compete in court i am not sure if it stays valid , based on the manner he ran his business .
Can any one please shed some light in this grey area.
When i asked him to explain the clause during the time of signing he said that i could not join his competetors for this client . I felt this cluase is reasonable to protect on his business interests , so i sighned it .
Now he is manuplating it to accomodate his interested , so he can squeeze more money out of me .
During my stay here , he NEWER paid me on time andi had to call him 20 times and mail him for 10 times ..literaly begging to get my pay .
If in worst case , if he tries to execute this non compete in court i am not sure if it stays valid , based on the manner he ran his business .
Can any one please shed some light in this grey area.
wallpaper quotes for yourself
aadimanav
06-22 12:25 AM
Source:
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
06/21/2009: CIR and What's Ahead
On Friday, Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs officially announced that the President was scheduled to call a small group of Congressional leaders and political leaders to the White House to open a dialogue on CIR next Thursday, 06/25/2009. Troublesome was another statement that recognizes the facts by the Press Secretary at the same press conference that the Congress did not have enough numbers to pass a CIR legislation. As we reported earlier, for a CIR to pass the Congress, it should pass both the Senate and the House. However, it is the House that lacks enough numbers at this time to pass a CIR legislation this year. There are a plenty of House legislators who represent districts that are politically not affected by the Hispanic population and their political pressures. These legislators usually form a group of Democratic represenstives who are either conservative and middle of the road in the political ideology. The situation tends to be different when it comes to the Senate that is consisted of legislators based on their statewide consistuencies as opposed to the House representatives that represent small neighborhood and district constituencies. The Senators' decisions are thus derived more from broader national political or statewide political issues and interests of the whole party. For this reasons, for the past several years, the Senate initiated and was able to pass CIR bills which have ended up in the ditch when it moved to the House floor. The background behind the Press Secretary's announcement downplaying the potential success of CIR within this year is their motivation to control unrealistic rise of expectation in the CIR supporting community on the President's initiatives that can also end up in another ditch with potential negative political fall-outs to his political leadership. The current politcal landscape and environment then raise two questions. The first question is whether the President and the Democratic Congress will have enough energy and zeal to successfuly change the existing political landscape, particularly in the House of Representatives, within such a limited time within this year. The Congress will soon go into the Summer recess and the remaining legislative days in the Congressional calendar for 2009 are very limited. The second question is why then Senate Majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, has been spinning in media on his agenda to take up a CIR bill this fall with the full realization of political reality that can be ditched again in the House. It appears that part of such spinning is related to his own political future. His seat in the Senate will be up for reelection in the national mid-term election in 2010 and he needs a strong support from the Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada. The Hispanic population has been rapidly growing durng the past several years in the State of Nevada. His push for a CIR will achieve his political calculation, no matter whether the bill will pass or fail in the Senate. Again, the chance for a CIR passing the Senate in 2009 is indeed very good as the chance for Senate Democrats pulling together 60 votes may turn realistic, particularly as affected by the final result of the current Senate election dispute in the State of Minnesota. In the very near future, the Minnesota Supreme Court is likely to hand down a decision sustaining the election of Mr. Al Franken, a progressive Democrat, as the next Senator, over the conservative former(?) Senator Norm Coleman. For the discussion per se, let's assume that the CIR fails to pass either in the Senate or in the House. The Senator Harry Reid will still get all the credits in his Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada for his initiatives in the Senate to legislate a CIR!
All in all, year 2009 will turn out to be the only year that can pass a CIR because this is a so-called leap-year when there is no national reelection and the House members will be less affected by their activities this year. The key is whether the President Obama will have enough energy, steam, and polical motive to make a full-court pressing and arm-twisting of the conservative Democratic members in the House within a "very" short period of time, within this Summer or early fall at the latest. Currently, his and Democrats' top two reform agenda stay with the nation's health care and energy reforms. Until we see such full dedication and commitment of the President to the CIR within a given time, one should not raise the level of his/her hope or expectation too high as it will indeed bring out really devastating frustration and hopelessness in 2010 in that considering the November 2010 mid-year election, the chance for CIR next year will turn out to be very slim because of the rerunnng Democrats in the election from small districts that are not affected by the Hispanic political pressures. Until we see such solid momentum and heat of passion on the part of the President leading to quick actions in the near future, all the media campaign and spinning of news by the White House and the Senator Reid may have to be taken with caution and discount.
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
06/21/2009: CIR and What's Ahead
On Friday, Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs officially announced that the President was scheduled to call a small group of Congressional leaders and political leaders to the White House to open a dialogue on CIR next Thursday, 06/25/2009. Troublesome was another statement that recognizes the facts by the Press Secretary at the same press conference that the Congress did not have enough numbers to pass a CIR legislation. As we reported earlier, for a CIR to pass the Congress, it should pass both the Senate and the House. However, it is the House that lacks enough numbers at this time to pass a CIR legislation this year. There are a plenty of House legislators who represent districts that are politically not affected by the Hispanic population and their political pressures. These legislators usually form a group of Democratic represenstives who are either conservative and middle of the road in the political ideology. The situation tends to be different when it comes to the Senate that is consisted of legislators based on their statewide consistuencies as opposed to the House representatives that represent small neighborhood and district constituencies. The Senators' decisions are thus derived more from broader national political or statewide political issues and interests of the whole party. For this reasons, for the past several years, the Senate initiated and was able to pass CIR bills which have ended up in the ditch when it moved to the House floor. The background behind the Press Secretary's announcement downplaying the potential success of CIR within this year is their motivation to control unrealistic rise of expectation in the CIR supporting community on the President's initiatives that can also end up in another ditch with potential negative political fall-outs to his political leadership. The current politcal landscape and environment then raise two questions. The first question is whether the President and the Democratic Congress will have enough energy and zeal to successfuly change the existing political landscape, particularly in the House of Representatives, within such a limited time within this year. The Congress will soon go into the Summer recess and the remaining legislative days in the Congressional calendar for 2009 are very limited. The second question is why then Senate Majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, has been spinning in media on his agenda to take up a CIR bill this fall with the full realization of political reality that can be ditched again in the House. It appears that part of such spinning is related to his own political future. His seat in the Senate will be up for reelection in the national mid-term election in 2010 and he needs a strong support from the Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada. The Hispanic population has been rapidly growing durng the past several years in the State of Nevada. His push for a CIR will achieve his political calculation, no matter whether the bill will pass or fail in the Senate. Again, the chance for a CIR passing the Senate in 2009 is indeed very good as the chance for Senate Democrats pulling together 60 votes may turn realistic, particularly as affected by the final result of the current Senate election dispute in the State of Minnesota. In the very near future, the Minnesota Supreme Court is likely to hand down a decision sustaining the election of Mr. Al Franken, a progressive Democrat, as the next Senator, over the conservative former(?) Senator Norm Coleman. For the discussion per se, let's assume that the CIR fails to pass either in the Senate or in the House. The Senator Harry Reid will still get all the credits in his Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada for his initiatives in the Senate to legislate a CIR!
All in all, year 2009 will turn out to be the only year that can pass a CIR because this is a so-called leap-year when there is no national reelection and the House members will be less affected by their activities this year. The key is whether the President Obama will have enough energy, steam, and polical motive to make a full-court pressing and arm-twisting of the conservative Democratic members in the House within a "very" short period of time, within this Summer or early fall at the latest. Currently, his and Democrats' top two reform agenda stay with the nation's health care and energy reforms. Until we see such full dedication and commitment of the President to the CIR within a given time, one should not raise the level of his/her hope or expectation too high as it will indeed bring out really devastating frustration and hopelessness in 2010 in that considering the November 2010 mid-year election, the chance for CIR next year will turn out to be very slim because of the rerunnng Democrats in the election from small districts that are not affected by the Hispanic political pressures. Until we see such solid momentum and heat of passion on the part of the President leading to quick actions in the near future, all the media campaign and spinning of news by the White House and the Senator Reid may have to be taken with caution and discount.
mrajatish
05-25 08:47 AM
Called Sen. Bingaman, Chuck Hagel's office - talked nicely to staff and explained. Wife is also calling - let us do this, folks, do you want to wait another 12 years while your gardenere gets his/her greencard. Wake up or sleep forever.
2011 liebe geft. Thursday, 28 April 2011; Thursday, 28 April 2011
pd_recapturing
03-07 08:46 PM
I have a quick question on salary issue with 485. My EB2 I-140 states that my yearly salary 87k per annum. It got approved last year. I realized that my w-2 only reflects 64k for last year. I did not work for 2 months because of some personal reason. Is this less salary going to affect my 485 application? I thougt, GC is for future jobs so its okay. Can somebody please clarify this ?
more...
fcres
07-12 04:43 PM
I think it is true that once you are counted in the cap you will not be counted again. so you can switch back and forth H4 and H1 without being counted in the quota.
This is what my lawyer also told me when i asked him about being on H4. I'm on 9th yr ext with approved I140 and my spouse is on non-profit H1.
This is what my lawyer also told me when i asked him about being on H4. I'm on 9th yr ext with approved I140 and my spouse is on non-profit H1.
gparr
April 3rd, 2005, 08:50 PM
Here's a link with steps for how to blend two images. You have to use a tripod and take them one after the other. Waiting until later would not have worked as the cloud formation would change. It's two exposures, one for the ground/dark part of the image and one for the sky. Try it by going out one evening and taking shots of a sunset and using one of the techniques in the link. One thing I learned at a Photoshop seminar I attended this week is not to merge the layers but under the Layers menu, choose Merge visible. Merging layers causes color loss/deterioration.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml
Gary
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml
Gary
more...
gceb3holder
02-27 08:09 AM
Right, the problem is: I do travel a lot and that makes a part time job difficult to find....
Other thing, the 6 months, is counted from the receipt date or the approval date?
Other thing, the 6 months, is counted from the receipt date or the approval date?
2010 liebe geft. better on Leia#39;s portrait. better on Leia#39;s portrait.
ps57002
09-15 09:53 PM
both employer and lawyer know in my case...it's not a problem. My supervisor supported me on it...
more...
meridiani.planum
02-20 01:00 PM
Hi,
i would like to convert EB3- pd to Eb2.
My sistuation is like this . pls help mw if you know if this is possible:
1.With My current employer :I have EB2- labor approved and i-140 also approved with PD of sep 2005.
2. My current employer has Eb-3 approved labor with PD of june 2003 of some other employee and can be substituted for me and get I-140 approval.
Now question is : Is it possible to port PD of the Eb-3 approved labor substituion and after i-140 approval of substituted labor to my EB-2 labor.
If it is possible how exactly PD is convertible..means will the attorney need to mention to use PD of EB-3 at the time of applying I-485.
When exactly can apply for PD conversion..at the time of applying i-485 or i-140 ..
If somebody clarify me that is great .
Thanks
labor substitution was banned last year. Now you can only interfile your own LCs/I-140s....
So your only option is to file a new EB3 LC+I-140 and recapture your EB2 PD and thats only useful in the rare chance that EB3 dates happen to be better than EB2 like in current VB. But odds of that remaining the same are very low I think, so you will just have to wait in your place in the queue now. alongwith all the others.
RIP LC-substitution.
i would like to convert EB3- pd to Eb2.
My sistuation is like this . pls help mw if you know if this is possible:
1.With My current employer :I have EB2- labor approved and i-140 also approved with PD of sep 2005.
2. My current employer has Eb-3 approved labor with PD of june 2003 of some other employee and can be substituted for me and get I-140 approval.
Now question is : Is it possible to port PD of the Eb-3 approved labor substituion and after i-140 approval of substituted labor to my EB-2 labor.
If it is possible how exactly PD is convertible..means will the attorney need to mention to use PD of EB-3 at the time of applying I-485.
When exactly can apply for PD conversion..at the time of applying i-485 or i-140 ..
If somebody clarify me that is great .
Thanks
labor substitution was banned last year. Now you can only interfile your own LCs/I-140s....
So your only option is to file a new EB3 LC+I-140 and recapture your EB2 PD and thats only useful in the rare chance that EB3 dates happen to be better than EB2 like in current VB. But odds of that remaining the same are very low I think, so you will just have to wait in your place in the queue now. alongwith all the others.
RIP LC-substitution.
hair liebe geft. Jimmie Johnson will lead the; Jimmie Johnson will lead the
dealsnet
07-23 02:12 PM
See this thread for it.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum105-immigrant-visa/200436-abandoning-aos-how-to-withdraw-i-485-options.html#post528499
In the stated situation, I would opt for changing the I-485 case to consular processing.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum105-immigrant-visa/200436-abandoning-aos-how-to-withdraw-i-485-options.html#post528499
In the stated situation, I would opt for changing the I-485 case to consular processing.
more...
coolngood4u80
10-20 12:12 PM
This is going nowhere... Guys what are prospects of Grassley winning the Nov elections...I hope he looses
hot liebe geft. Donatella obviously past down; Donatella obviously past down
gc_chahiye
10-05 04:12 PM
How big of a risk would it be to file on EB2? If they reject me for EB2, would it hurt my chances on applying again on EB3? How much time would I lose in case of a rejection?
getting rejected in EB2 does not impact your case for EB3 (they might look up that older file and see that it was rejected because of education qualification for EB2, but does qualify for EB3).
You will probably get an RFE at I-140 time. USCIS will either reject this case, in which case you will lose this complete GC process and need to restart from scratch (so you'll lose maybe 1 years worth of place in the queue). Or they might ask you to accept this in EB3, in which case you dont lose your LC and the PD that goes with it.
getting rejected in EB2 does not impact your case for EB3 (they might look up that older file and see that it was rejected because of education qualification for EB2, but does qualify for EB3).
You will probably get an RFE at I-140 time. USCIS will either reject this case, in which case you will lose this complete GC process and need to restart from scratch (so you'll lose maybe 1 years worth of place in the queue). Or they might ask you to accept this in EB3, in which case you dont lose your LC and the PD that goes with it.
more...
house liebe geft
SunnySurya
08-03 08:32 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
tattoo liebe geft. quotes for yourself; quotes for yourself
ksairi
08-17 08:41 AM
Kindly inform your friend that uscis is just accepting application for skilled workers at the moment.
HOW your answer relates to my question?
HOW your answer relates to my question?
more...
pictures liebe geft. holding hands poem
mbartosik
09-12 07:34 PM
If you are on bench, not getting paid, your employer normally asks you to send him a letter stating that you are on vacation. This needs to be done every month. For the period you are on vacation, there may not be any pay stubs. Once you get any project, you will send your employer another letter saying that you are back and ready to work for them.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
If you are "on the bench" the employer is obligated to pay you.
If you state that you are on vacation when in fact your are "on bench", and later misrepresent being on the bench as vacation to USCIS you and your employer either committing fraud or conspiring to commit fraud.
The employer must allow for "on the bench" time in the salary quoted in the LCA that accompanies the I-129 for H1B. If "on the bench" time is not allowed for it probably invalidates the prevailing wage comparison.
If your employer does not allow for 'on the bench' time in the wage rates quoted, then there is a reasonable argument that you are not meeting prevailing wage, and are infact undercutting US wages (and then some of what Lou Dobbs says is right).
If you are a consultant you could drop the quoted salary on LCA (but must remain above prevailing wage) to allow for risk of "on the bench" or any other circumstances. That way there is money to cover any gap. However, that requires more trust in the middle man - employer.
I'm not sure if I've read it right, but it looks to me like you have made a public confession here.
Of course the period between projects is an ideal time for vacation, as there is no project schedule to deal with. So whether the law is being broken I guess depends on what the motivation is for the vacation, something that is hard to prove. If the employer says you are going to tell him that you are on vacation until he finds more work then that sounds illegal. If on the other hand if you say, "how about I take this opportunity for some vacation?", it is okay.
One would hope that USCIS expercise common sense. However, common sense could mean being suspicious of gaps because the system is clearly open to abuse.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
If you are "on the bench" the employer is obligated to pay you.
If you state that you are on vacation when in fact your are "on bench", and later misrepresent being on the bench as vacation to USCIS you and your employer either committing fraud or conspiring to commit fraud.
The employer must allow for "on the bench" time in the salary quoted in the LCA that accompanies the I-129 for H1B. If "on the bench" time is not allowed for it probably invalidates the prevailing wage comparison.
If your employer does not allow for 'on the bench' time in the wage rates quoted, then there is a reasonable argument that you are not meeting prevailing wage, and are infact undercutting US wages (and then some of what Lou Dobbs says is right).
If you are a consultant you could drop the quoted salary on LCA (but must remain above prevailing wage) to allow for risk of "on the bench" or any other circumstances. That way there is money to cover any gap. However, that requires more trust in the middle man - employer.
I'm not sure if I've read it right, but it looks to me like you have made a public confession here.
Of course the period between projects is an ideal time for vacation, as there is no project schedule to deal with. So whether the law is being broken I guess depends on what the motivation is for the vacation, something that is hard to prove. If the employer says you are going to tell him that you are on vacation until he finds more work then that sounds illegal. If on the other hand if you say, "how about I take this opportunity for some vacation?", it is okay.
One would hope that USCIS expercise common sense. However, common sense could mean being suspicious of gaps because the system is clearly open to abuse.
dresses speakerms Liebe+geft
greencardfever2007
06-23 11:58 AM
I have filed I-485 under EB2 category using EB3 priority date along with copy of approved EB3 I-140 approval notice. Now my employer is considering reusing my approved EB3 labor for someone else, thinking that my EB2 I-485 application will not be impacted as it is now filed with CIS. Can the employer reuse the EB3 labor without impacting my case? :confused:
Please advice.
Thank you.
Please advice.
Thank you.
more...
makeup liebe geft. museum of tolerance; museum of tolerance
satya1234
03-29 08:49 PM
Thanks you very much for the reply.I appreciate.
Yes, Thats perfectly right.
Extension with Employer A is pending, reason is Security CheckThats what i was told and can't be done any thing untill they get back).
Yeah I am planning to go to India and try to get stamped there. But am just wondering that as the Extension with Employer A is in security check so does this cause any issues/delay in giving Visa in india.
Yes, Thats perfectly right.
Extension with Employer A is pending, reason is Security CheckThats what i was told and can't be done any thing untill they get back).
Yeah I am planning to go to India and try to get stamped there. But am just wondering that as the Extension with Employer A is in security check so does this cause any issues/delay in giving Visa in india.
girlfriend liebe geft
miguy
06-16 08:19 AM
what if your wife has a B1/B2 status.......can you still file for I-485?...Has anyone encountered a similar situations?
thanks,
thanks,
hairstyles liebe geft. love
rockstart
07-16 11:24 AM
Can any one tell what is written on Eb3 I 140. I am assuming it will be
Sec 203 (b) (3)
but is there any text associated?
For example, if it says 'Mem of Profession w/Adv Deg, or Exceptional ability Sec 203 (b) (2)' it is EB2. So it's what's checked in when u file your 140, and what it is approved for.
Sec 203 (b) (3)
but is there any text associated?
For example, if it says 'Mem of Profession w/Adv Deg, or Exceptional ability Sec 203 (b) (2)' it is EB2. So it's what's checked in when u file your 140, and what it is approved for.
fromnaija
09-22 05:55 PM
Is it possible to include "allow filing 485" if labor has been pending for 2+ years?
Its not just people who have labor approved and are waiting for PD to be current. In fact there are a lot of ppl who are waiting for labor for 4+ years.
I think its perfectly doable. If its ok to ask for ability to file 485 without PD being current, I think its ok to ask for ability to file 485 while labor is pending.
But I guess we have gone thru this a dozen times and it doesn't appear that the plight of ppl stuck in PBEC is on IV agenda.
I don't think that would be okay as you would then be jumping the hoop of I-140. I think we should just stay with the modest request of "filing 485" without visa number availability.
Its not just people who have labor approved and are waiting for PD to be current. In fact there are a lot of ppl who are waiting for labor for 4+ years.
I think its perfectly doable. If its ok to ask for ability to file 485 without PD being current, I think its ok to ask for ability to file 485 while labor is pending.
But I guess we have gone thru this a dozen times and it doesn't appear that the plight of ppl stuck in PBEC is on IV agenda.
I don't think that would be okay as you would then be jumping the hoop of I-140. I think we should just stay with the modest request of "filing 485" without visa number availability.
texanmom
08-31 11:45 AM
Be an active participant and help us help you.
This is what I can infer from the poll
93% of them lack talent
7% are talented
This is what I can infer from the poll
93% of them lack talent
7% are talented
0 comments:
Post a Comment