arumalla
07-08 04:45 PM
can some one send me the updated notice page link, so I can post some threads and start linking to that page in all the tech and news forums I know of... so that we can get more awareness of this issue....
Thanks
Chandra Arumalla
Thanks
Chandra Arumalla
wallpaper Here is a map of the Roman
americandesi
04-22 02:21 PM
I work for company A which sent me to client C through company B(Prefered vendor). After working with the same client for 1.5 yrs, transfered my h1b to company B(PF) due to issues with the pay with company A. Company A has deducted huge sum of money($4000) from my last months pay towards PERM filing(Still under process). Upon demanding them to reimburse my money saying that its against law, they r threatening me saying that based on non-compete agreement they will take legal action against me.
I am not actually aware of the clauses in the agreement. company B(PF) told me that it does not have any clauses in its agreement with company A prohibiting them from taking me.Though i requested company A to provide me a copy of non-compete, they said i signed with them, they haven�t. The company is located in NJ and not sure how non-competes work under NJ state law.
I am really frustated upon this blackmail and going thru lot of pressure. The amount is too big too leave and cannot afford to hire a lawyer in case they file suit based on non-compete. even if i had signed a non compete agreement how does it stand as it is conflicting the agreement which company a signed with PF sayign tht upon my termination of the emplyment with them, Pf can take me without any gap period... what can i do to get my money. they also refused to provide me with experience letter which i need for my future GC filing.
Plz give me ur valuable inputs
Restrictive employment contracts are non-enforcable, atleast in California. Here's a classic case of a H1B employee who successfully sued his employer on a restrictive employment contract and the employer was ordered to pay $215,050.61 in damages.
http://www.news.com/Body-shop-must-pay-fees-in-H-1B-lawsuit/2100-1017_3-256477.html
Also note that all PERM related expenses should be borne only by the employer. Refer the following link and search for "Certain Payments are Employer's Expenses under PERM" and "Employer Must Pay even with Dual Representation "
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_filrem.html
I am not actually aware of the clauses in the agreement. company B(PF) told me that it does not have any clauses in its agreement with company A prohibiting them from taking me.Though i requested company A to provide me a copy of non-compete, they said i signed with them, they haven�t. The company is located in NJ and not sure how non-competes work under NJ state law.
I am really frustated upon this blackmail and going thru lot of pressure. The amount is too big too leave and cannot afford to hire a lawyer in case they file suit based on non-compete. even if i had signed a non compete agreement how does it stand as it is conflicting the agreement which company a signed with PF sayign tht upon my termination of the emplyment with them, Pf can take me without any gap period... what can i do to get my money. they also refused to provide me with experience letter which i need for my future GC filing.
Plz give me ur valuable inputs
Restrictive employment contracts are non-enforcable, atleast in California. Here's a classic case of a H1B employee who successfully sued his employer on a restrictive employment contract and the employer was ordered to pay $215,050.61 in damages.
http://www.news.com/Body-shop-must-pay-fees-in-H-1B-lawsuit/2100-1017_3-256477.html
Also note that all PERM related expenses should be borne only by the employer. Refer the following link and search for "Certain Payments are Employer's Expenses under PERM" and "Employer Must Pay even with Dual Representation "
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_filrem.html
cram
06-12 11:00 AM
Originally Posted by cram
Fortunately, my PD became current on May 1
Did you get your receipt?
No, I didn't get my receipt yet. I called my lawyer and she said that the checks haven't cleared yet. It's taking toooo long. I don't know what's going on. Anybody in the same situation?
Fortunately, my PD became current on May 1
Did you get your receipt?
No, I didn't get my receipt yet. I called my lawyer and she said that the checks haven't cleared yet. It's taking toooo long. I don't know what's going on. Anybody in the same situation?
2011 and the East Roman Empire
gccovet
03-04 08:57 AM
As we have crossed 2K, I am sending another $25.00 as I had promised.
GCCovet
GCCovet
more...
greatzolin
08-17 07:04 PM
The only way to know if you case got transfered is by the RN? or if the checks have the number on the back?
Txs
Txs
gsc999
07-20 02:08 PM
Zoooom, Anzeraja & All pledgers,
Thanks for driving this effort. Subsequent to Aman's post, we can direct these pledges to the normal contribution drive for IV.
It was amazing to see such response to call for funds for Aman and other core members.
Thanks for driving this effort. Subsequent to Aman's post, we can direct these pledges to the normal contribution drive for IV.
It was amazing to see such response to call for funds for Aman and other core members.
more...
anukcs
09-02 11:33 PM
Received 'Card Production Ordered' email for my EAD few minutes back. Had received the same email yesterday for my wife. AP was approved for both me and my wife on 7/24. RD is 6/19/08 and ND is 6/23/08.
I am now relieved since I am currently working on EAD and current EAD expires on 10/4.
Regards,
I am now relieved since I am currently working on EAD and current EAD expires on 10/4.
Regards,
2010 Map of the Roman Empire at its
jtravers
11-21 11:47 PM
Hi Mehul,
We are praying for you. Do not loose hope. God has taken you this far and nothing is impossible for HIM.
I have known quite a few people who have been cancer survivors, some have gone through treatment and in some cases without treatment, it just went away. Like I said, don't loose hope. Try out the options that a lot of the folks have suggested on this forum and continue praying.
We are praying for you. Do not loose hope. God has taken you this far and nothing is impossible for HIM.
I have known quite a few people who have been cancer survivors, some have gone through treatment and in some cases without treatment, it just went away. Like I said, don't loose hope. Try out the options that a lot of the folks have suggested on this forum and continue praying.
more...
z029556
09-24 05:45 PM
Hi Guys,
My application was sent on Aug 7th reached USCIS (NSC)on Aug 8th. Recieved my reciept # today from lawyer. But my wife haven't recieved the RN. Was wondering if any one are in the same boat.
Regards
VJ
My application was sent on Aug 7th reached USCIS (NSC)on Aug 8th. Recieved my reciept # today from lawyer. But my wife haven't recieved the RN. Was wondering if any one are in the same boat.
Regards
VJ
hair of the Roman empire
Sachin_Stock
09-25 12:34 PM
Here's what the law says:
8 CFR 204.5(e) relating to PD transfer between eb categories
(e) Retention of section 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) priority date. A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
I hope that clears the air.
8 CFR 204.5(e) relating to PD transfer between eb categories
(e) Retention of section 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) priority date. A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
I hope that clears the air.
more...
simple1
05-01 12:00 PM
gc_on_demand ,
I am not anti at all. I am trying to understand the law.
How does a (I485) spouse doesnt have EAD and AP on hand (even if not using it and in H4/L2 etc)?
Wont they have problem when the dates become current and GC is issued to primary.
I am not anti at all. I am trying to understand the law.
How does a (I485) spouse doesnt have EAD and AP on hand (even if not using it and in H4/L2 etc)?
Wont they have problem when the dates become current and GC is issued to primary.
hot Large Map of Roman Empire
chanduy9
07-03 02:45 PM
Once you sent the flowers pls poll @
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6029
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6029
more...
house Roman Empire map
shantak
02-03 05:23 PM
I have been waiting for the FP in the hope that they will be issuing it soon, its already Feb and I have not received it yet. Im the only one who has not recieved the notice yet in my friends circle, I have opened an SR last week. Mine is TSC application. Are there any TSC guys yet to receive the FP notices. Overall are there a significant number of people still waiting or is it just a few of us
Thanks
Thanks
tattoo Roman Empire During Third
akhilmahajan
02-17 10:21 AM
Come on folks, lets get the contribution campaign moving.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
more...
pictures Roman Empire, a.d. 14
n2b
08-13 11:29 AM
Ok saw the Receipts - The ND is 8/4/2007 (they are working on Saturdays)
dresses Click on the map for
getgc2008
08-25 02:17 PM
I got approval email 3 weeks back. Does anyone know how long it takes to get the physical Card? I have not seen any updates after this. Thanks in advance
Post Decision Activity
On August 3, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS.
Post Decision Activity
On August 3, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS.
more...
makeup The Roman Empire 1st Century
garybanz
11-21 01:34 PM
Lets us all Pray and hope for the best for Mehul
May God give strength to your family and you to deal with this situation. I don't think any of us can do any thing to ease your family and your pain, but we will pray for you. You have all our wishes and support.
Regards
May God give strength to your family and you to deal with this situation. I don't think any of us can do any thing to ease your family and your pain, but we will pray for you. You have all our wishes and support.
Regards
girlfriend The Roman Empire
karthiknv143
09-28 02:35 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ace7ec20cfbd4110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D
hairstyles height of Roman empire.gif
TeddyKoochu
09-24 08:34 AM
my dear friend come back in reality..... to put it least harshly... �khayali pulav banana band karo� (stop day dreaming)
IV core needs to focus on real issues and obstructions which anti throw our way
I believe that you dismissed my suggestion even before considering or reading it. Mere bhai mai yaha khayali pulav nahi paka raha (Brother Iam not day dreaming). However if you don't like my suggestion / idea I respect your opinion, peace !
First and foremost you do not need approval from anti's just some of their achievements are a) Neufiled h1B memo b) higher H1B fees c) Unnecessary RFE's on H1B extensions (Client Letter etc).
Now coming to the other group Illegal�s they will never support us "Legal�s" thank god the dream act is defeated and I hope CIR with illegal amnesty never sees the light of day. Iam sure you know why EB3-I is languished in 2001 for the last 5 years it was 245I.
To cut it short anti's and illegal�s will neither ever help or support our causes.
Coming to IV efforts they are indeed applaudable, however looks like some in the group like to oppose everything.
1) Allowing everybody to file for 485 if i140 is approved, we have a few who oppose this look at the poll results. Requires change of law.
2) Recapture won't fly with the agencies they won't accept wasted visas thing that easily. Requires change of law.
3) Country cap elimination, folks from ROW will be bitterly opposed to it in the name of diversity but the reality is that it is utterly unfair, in fact EB3 ROW is cruising comfortably but they complain about spillover, some of our friends from EB3-I also talk about the spillover rule but they don't realize the fact that all spillover goes to EB3 Row and it will not be current literally even in the next 5 or maybe 10 years because EB3 ROW has steady demand unlike EB2 ROW.
4) What�s left is excluding dependents from the EB cap, nobody except for illegals and anti's will oppose it. Anyway there seems to be no Cap for Illegal�s and Anti's but one thing is for sure that they are always united.
Friends once again I wish to say that this is the only unifying idea for the legal immigrant community and this is the way everybody can see green in the next 2 years. No other idea gives green to everybody in a 2 Yr timeframe. I agree it won't fly and requires a change of law but probably its the way to go. I would give all the credit to maverick979 and deepimpact for suggesting this on another blog if I remember correctly.
IV core needs to focus on real issues and obstructions which anti throw our way
I believe that you dismissed my suggestion even before considering or reading it. Mere bhai mai yaha khayali pulav nahi paka raha (Brother Iam not day dreaming). However if you don't like my suggestion / idea I respect your opinion, peace !
First and foremost you do not need approval from anti's just some of their achievements are a) Neufiled h1B memo b) higher H1B fees c) Unnecessary RFE's on H1B extensions (Client Letter etc).
Now coming to the other group Illegal�s they will never support us "Legal�s" thank god the dream act is defeated and I hope CIR with illegal amnesty never sees the light of day. Iam sure you know why EB3-I is languished in 2001 for the last 5 years it was 245I.
To cut it short anti's and illegal�s will neither ever help or support our causes.
Coming to IV efforts they are indeed applaudable, however looks like some in the group like to oppose everything.
1) Allowing everybody to file for 485 if i140 is approved, we have a few who oppose this look at the poll results. Requires change of law.
2) Recapture won't fly with the agencies they won't accept wasted visas thing that easily. Requires change of law.
3) Country cap elimination, folks from ROW will be bitterly opposed to it in the name of diversity but the reality is that it is utterly unfair, in fact EB3 ROW is cruising comfortably but they complain about spillover, some of our friends from EB3-I also talk about the spillover rule but they don't realize the fact that all spillover goes to EB3 Row and it will not be current literally even in the next 5 or maybe 10 years because EB3 ROW has steady demand unlike EB2 ROW.
4) What�s left is excluding dependents from the EB cap, nobody except for illegals and anti's will oppose it. Anyway there seems to be no Cap for Illegal�s and Anti's but one thing is for sure that they are always united.
Friends once again I wish to say that this is the only unifying idea for the legal immigrant community and this is the way everybody can see green in the next 2 years. No other idea gives green to everybody in a 2 Yr timeframe. I agree it won't fly and requires a change of law but probably its the way to go. I would give all the credit to maverick979 and deepimpact for suggesting this on another blog if I remember correctly.
svgupta
05-23 11:43 AM
to everyone on the list.
Folks! who are still procrastinating .. plz DO send the mail right away. It won't matter if you do it later.
And sure, you can always think others are anyways, doing it... that should be enough. It won't be... Go ahead and send mails... (ref: 1st page of this thread).
GO IV!
Folks! who are still procrastinating .. plz DO send the mail right away. It won't matter if you do it later.
And sure, you can always think others are anyways, doing it... that should be enough. It won't be... Go ahead and send mails... (ref: 1st page of this thread).
GO IV!
delax
07-27 01:48 PM
Under the latest interpretation, EB3-I India will not get benefit until EB3-ROW gets benefit. So EB3-ROW benefiting will eventually benefit Eb3-I. That is the logical background.
The other two issues , which provided temporary relief, would have been redundant If we had recaptured the visas. Most of us, across the EB category/Country, would have been current or near current , rendering these issues redundant.
IV still went ahead with it (I am glad) knowing fully well recapture is difficult issue.
So no harm in EB3-I seeking temporary relief while still joining forces on the recapture issue.
Now you need to explain How EB3-I seeking favorable interpretation of spill over distribution undermines "Recapture effort". How are these related??
Chmur; I appreciate your post. For the sake of a discussion could you share what is the temporary relief that you are seeking. I am curious to know the details. Is it
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
The other two issues , which provided temporary relief, would have been redundant If we had recaptured the visas. Most of us, across the EB category/Country, would have been current or near current , rendering these issues redundant.
IV still went ahead with it (I am glad) knowing fully well recapture is difficult issue.
So no harm in EB3-I seeking temporary relief while still joining forces on the recapture issue.
Now you need to explain How EB3-I seeking favorable interpretation of spill over distribution undermines "Recapture effort". How are these related??
Chmur; I appreciate your post. For the sake of a discussion could you share what is the temporary relief that you are seeking. I am curious to know the details. Is it
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
No comments:
Post a Comment