gcgonewild
08-15 02:16 PM
Unless:
i) Has company A paid you all your wages?
If there is a window when you were not paid, they wouldn't even think about suing you.Become a whistle blower, Complain to the DOL if you were not paid prevailing wages.
ii) Content of Non-Compete agreement:
If the Non-Compete agreement is overly restraining, it is not valid. Check the statements. If it says more than 2 years, and no geographical limits, it is not valid. Does it say you cannot join B or you cannot join any end-client ?
iv) LCA for new work location:
If you work for more than 6 months in a county, new LCA should be applied for that location.
Try to negotiate with A. Usually these lawsuits don't run their course.
Attorney fees are: minimum 2k just for consultation. 5k if A comes to negotiation after lawsuit. 10-15k if it goes to trial. So instead of paying the attorney , you could pay A and get away.
If all fails, You MUST consult an attorney.
IMHO, you should've consulted before you took the job.
i) Has company A paid you all your wages?
If there is a window when you were not paid, they wouldn't even think about suing you.Become a whistle blower, Complain to the DOL if you were not paid prevailing wages.
ii) Content of Non-Compete agreement:
If the Non-Compete agreement is overly restraining, it is not valid. Check the statements. If it says more than 2 years, and no geographical limits, it is not valid. Does it say you cannot join B or you cannot join any end-client ?
iv) LCA for new work location:
If you work for more than 6 months in a county, new LCA should be applied for that location.
Try to negotiate with A. Usually these lawsuits don't run their course.
Attorney fees are: minimum 2k just for consultation. 5k if A comes to negotiation after lawsuit. 10-15k if it goes to trial. So instead of paying the attorney , you could pay A and get away.
If all fails, You MUST consult an attorney.
IMHO, you should've consulted before you took the job.
wallpaper 2011 poemas, de odio, de amor,
Kodi
08-28 06:50 PM
Received 2 yr EAD, I-140 pending as of 4/18/08
watzgc
05-27 05:29 PM
my receipt date is Jul 14th 2007 , got RFE Mar 09th 2008 and replied to RFE Apr 09th 2008 and still waiting.... wat say with u all waiting just 4-5 monts.. thanks,
2011 imagenes de amor
nepaliboy
02-11 10:01 PM
I am also same boat. Not yet
more...
mohitb272
03-19 01:17 PM
No, I140 is not denied, its pending as per USCIS website. However, reason for I485 denial is that I140 is denied. Is this something to do with the RFE on I140? I dont see any logic in this...
uffyegc
10-16 02:51 PM
Hi,
My friend is in a unique situation and needs help. Please guide him with his queries.
**************************************************
I'm in USA on H1B since Apr-17-2004 with out any break. I'll complete my 6 year stay in USA H1B by Apr-16-2010.
My current H1B & I-94 extension was applied on Jun-06-2008 (applied in a group) and approved till May-01-2011.
My GC labor was applied on May-29-2008 and approved on Oct-11-2008. But..
We didn't specify about GC labor on H1B/I-94 extension petition.
My GC I-140 was appilied on Nov-12-2008 and approved on Apr-20-2009.
Can you please suggest when should I apply for my next H1B & I-94 extensions (based on 'Apr-16-2010' OR 'May-01-2011') ?
************************************************** *********
My friend is in a unique situation and needs help. Please guide him with his queries.
**************************************************
I'm in USA on H1B since Apr-17-2004 with out any break. I'll complete my 6 year stay in USA H1B by Apr-16-2010.
My current H1B & I-94 extension was applied on Jun-06-2008 (applied in a group) and approved till May-01-2011.
My GC labor was applied on May-29-2008 and approved on Oct-11-2008. But..
We didn't specify about GC labor on H1B/I-94 extension petition.
My GC I-140 was appilied on Nov-12-2008 and approved on Apr-20-2009.
Can you please suggest when should I apply for my next H1B & I-94 extensions (based on 'Apr-16-2010' OR 'May-01-2011') ?
************************************************** *********
more...
needhelp!
09-22 01:50 PM
I'd like to think it was our media campaign letters that did it :)
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-inline_21edi.ART.State.Edition1.427fa5a.html
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-inline_21edi.ART.State.Edition1.427fa5a.html
2010 poemas de odio y amor.
donsimahajan
06-20 05:46 PM
The reason why EB2 India is moving so fast is because people with 2001 PDs are stuck in BECs. Once they come to apply for I-140/I-485, EB2 India PD will retrogress to 2001 again. So the progress you are watching is an illusion.
That's a good point. It will be terrible to see the dates retrogress again. There's no end to this.
Donsi
That's a good point. It will be terrible to see the dates retrogress again. There's no end to this.
Donsi
more...
yabadaba
06-30 03:23 PM
Gautam Agarwal...who was planning on going to Wharton based on the july bulletin... have you heard anything from the ombudsman office on this speculation of retrogression???
hair Del amor al odio hay un
pcs
01-01 08:46 AM
Thanks for the info but my question is about multiple I-485 filing...
Is is legally possible to do that ? If one could do that, will it create I-485 processing complicated ?
Thanks
Is is legally possible to do that ? If one could do that, will it create I-485 processing complicated ?
Thanks
more...
dixie
08-22 01:14 PM
Any US postgraduate degree + 3 years prior to I-140/I-485. Read the text of the bill for more details.
You mean 3 year experience in US no matter from where you got your masters degree or
Only US degree + 3 years experience will get exemption?
You mean 3 year experience in US no matter from where you got your masters degree or
Only US degree + 3 years experience will get exemption?
hot hairstyles odio y amor. poemas
.JPG "poemas de odio y amor. poemas")
actonwang
01-18 12:42 PM
yes. i agree above
I think the author is referring to the first step (labor) which INS will undoubtfully reject a lot of applications if in recession or in down time.
I think the author is referring to the first step (labor) which INS will undoubtfully reject a lot of applications if in recession or in down time.
more...
house odio y amor. poemas
Circus123
03-14 08:39 PM
Hey check this prediction out.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4541
I think it is like a orchard of mangoes miles long. The riped mangoes are plucked and the farmer moves on to the next tree. He has to walk up and down the whole stretch every month in the second week to determine what's ripe and what's not. He then comes back with his helpers with baskets . There might be some accidental drops of ripe mangoes which get lost for a while :) Just my analogy of EB immigration .
Correct me if I am wrong...
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4541
I think it is like a orchard of mangoes miles long. The riped mangoes are plucked and the farmer moves on to the next tree. He has to walk up and down the whole stretch every month in the second week to determine what's ripe and what's not. He then comes back with his helpers with baskets . There might be some accidental drops of ripe mangoes which get lost for a while :) Just my analogy of EB immigration .
Correct me if I am wrong...
tattoo poemas de odio y amor.
bfadlia
03-17 12:13 PM
^^^^^^^^^
more...
pictures Poemas de amor y odio.
lazycis
02-28 12:42 PM
canu post the USCIS link for these 2 laws
Link to the INA (see chapter 245)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
Link to 8 CFR (see part 274a)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=68ba267609da05e160433ee0f3c73 289
Link to the INA (see chapter 245)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
Link to 8 CFR (see part 274a)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=68ba267609da05e160433ee0f3c73 289
dresses poemas de odio y amor. poemas
knowDOL
06-05 09:27 AM
oh! what a luck. I have not come across anyone who has this situation. My guess is that you should have no problem for 1 year extensions but you cannot get 3 year extensions because 3 year extensions are only for people who cannot file for i485 because of retrogression and you do not meet that criteria and According to Yates memo you are eligible for 1 year extension.
more...
makeup poemas de odio y amor. poemas
Quadrucle
09-22 02:11 PM
Hi All,
Im planning to port my EB3 to EB2 and need your help.
My EB3 PD is Nov 2007. I have my I-140 approved too. This all was sponsored by my empoloyer. I have over 8 years of experience and I have Masters degree in Computers. Now my questions are:
1. How do I start my EB2 process? (if this is possible)
2. What do my employer needs to do to help me on this?
The reason why they did EB3 was because my designation didnt require a Masters. Do they have to promote me or create a new designation to do this? My company almost stopped sponsoring EB's an year back.
3. What will happen to my EB3 process if I am starting EB2.
4. How expensive will be the whole process? I guess I will have to take the expense for Labor and I-140 from my pocket.
Thanks in advance.
Im planning to port my EB3 to EB2 and need your help.
My EB3 PD is Nov 2007. I have my I-140 approved too. This all was sponsored by my empoloyer. I have over 8 years of experience and I have Masters degree in Computers. Now my questions are:
1. How do I start my EB2 process? (if this is possible)
2. What do my employer needs to do to help me on this?
The reason why they did EB3 was because my designation didnt require a Masters. Do they have to promote me or create a new designation to do this? My company almost stopped sponsoring EB's an year back.
3. What will happen to my EB3 process if I am starting EB2.
4. How expensive will be the whole process? I guess I will have to take the expense for Labor and I-140 from my pocket.
Thanks in advance.
girlfriend poemas de odio y amor. odio y
nepaliboy
02-11 10:01 PM
I am also same boat. Not yet
hairstyles poemas de odio y amor. poemas
m1801b
09-11 12:33 AM
Thanks for all the suggestions. Today, I discussed my option (H-1b extension and PERM) with a local lawyer. He mentioned that:
1. I can't recapture the time spent outside USA in the last 6 years for the new H-1 extension since I am currently in my 8th year of H-1 extension. I could have recaptured the time only if it was for 7th year extension.
2. If my employer transitions me to the new outsourcing company (my employer is transitioning all IT to this outsourcing company) instead of laying me off, my LC and I-140 won't remain the same since it is not a situation of acquisition or merger where the new company gets all liabilities from the old company. It will depend on the new outsourcing company whether to file a new petition for me or not.
3. If I am laid off with a severance pay (I know for sure that I would get 6 weeks of severance if I am laid off), I can show this amount as my usual salary for the next 1 and half months. This will give me ample grace period for doing the new H-1 and PERM with any new employer.
4. Even though my current H1 extension is valid for another 9 months only, the new H-1b petition with a new employer will get me 1 whole year of H-1b extension.
I felt that the the local lawyer (he is not 100% into immigration) was not 100% sure about the above things.
I am planning to talk to some other attorney (who is only into immigration) this weekend but I would appreciate any suggestions of you friendly and helpful folks over here in IV.
Some folks have suggested me to get a consulting from someone from Sheela Murthy.
Thanks you so much.
1. I can't recapture the time spent outside USA in the last 6 years for the new H-1 extension since I am currently in my 8th year of H-1 extension. I could have recaptured the time only if it was for 7th year extension.
2. If my employer transitions me to the new outsourcing company (my employer is transitioning all IT to this outsourcing company) instead of laying me off, my LC and I-140 won't remain the same since it is not a situation of acquisition or merger where the new company gets all liabilities from the old company. It will depend on the new outsourcing company whether to file a new petition for me or not.
3. If I am laid off with a severance pay (I know for sure that I would get 6 weeks of severance if I am laid off), I can show this amount as my usual salary for the next 1 and half months. This will give me ample grace period for doing the new H-1 and PERM with any new employer.
4. Even though my current H1 extension is valid for another 9 months only, the new H-1b petition with a new employer will get me 1 whole year of H-1b extension.
I felt that the the local lawyer (he is not 100% into immigration) was not 100% sure about the above things.
I am planning to talk to some other attorney (who is only into immigration) this weekend but I would appreciate any suggestions of you friendly and helpful folks over here in IV.
Some folks have suggested me to get a consulting from someone from Sheela Murthy.
Thanks you so much.
sxv7392
12-19 11:42 AM
We are about 4 people in Austin we need some direction so that we can be of some help.
waitnwatch
05-25 07:40 PM
Here is my reading of the amendment.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment