Sai gc
09-23 04:54 PM
case process resumed ,Soft LUD everyday after RFE response,Any thoughts whats going on
My case details:
PD 2004 october(substituted)(NSC)
I 140 approved on october 2007
Got EAD's and AP's for both me and my spouse.
I 485-Received mail from Uscis on August 23rd,requesting for Evidence(no change in online status though).
RFE was for EVL,for which response was sent on 16 th sep(through Murthy firm )
Hard LUD on 17th september,change in online status,"received RFE response case process resumed"
soft LUDs on my application on 18,19,20,22 and 23rd.
soft LUDs on spouse application on 22nd and 23 rd.
What does this mean,My case is being processed ,any chances of getting GC this month?Any thoughts?
Hopefully this means Good news.
OM Sai
My case details:
PD 2004 october(substituted)(NSC)
I 140 approved on october 2007
Got EAD's and AP's for both me and my spouse.
I 485-Received mail from Uscis on August 23rd,requesting for Evidence(no change in online status though).
RFE was for EVL,for which response was sent on 16 th sep(through Murthy firm )
Hard LUD on 17th september,change in online status,"received RFE response case process resumed"
soft LUDs on my application on 18,19,20,22 and 23rd.
soft LUDs on spouse application on 22nd and 23 rd.
What does this mean,My case is being processed ,any chances of getting GC this month?Any thoughts?
Hopefully this means Good news.
OM Sai
wallpaper Protestant Reformation
shreekhand
08-06 11:14 PM
Some more data points to that calculation:
There are 44 I-485 adjudicators at NSC (an NSC IIO mentioned that to me a few months ago) at the conservative rate of 6 apps/visa numbers (EB only) per adjudicator per day it will be 264 visa numbers per day just at NSC.
Double that and you reach 528 per day at NSC + TSC only.
Not including district office and consular numbers.
Say 600 EB approvals per day * 21 working days of August would make it 12600 EB approvals in August.
If ones multiplies that number for 12 months we reach 151,200 EB visas...which is so close to the number that was approved last year ! (Includes numbers from FB overflow)
1% to 5% of I485 applicants register in . This figure 1% to 5% is quoted at several places and in absence of any other data, I am using this data. If we take median value of 3% worldwide EB2 approvals are around 50 and so TSC+NSC approved 1600 cases in four working days of August (400 per day).
Median value is OK for reference, couple of places, it is quoted that 20,000 GC numbers are available for EB2. For 40 working days in Aug/Sep, it averages to 500 GC per day.
There are 44 I-485 adjudicators at NSC (an NSC IIO mentioned that to me a few months ago) at the conservative rate of 6 apps/visa numbers (EB only) per adjudicator per day it will be 264 visa numbers per day just at NSC.
Double that and you reach 528 per day at NSC + TSC only.
Not including district office and consular numbers.
Say 600 EB approvals per day * 21 working days of August would make it 12600 EB approvals in August.
If ones multiplies that number for 12 months we reach 151,200 EB visas...which is so close to the number that was approved last year ! (Includes numbers from FB overflow)
1% to 5% of I485 applicants register in . This figure 1% to 5% is quoted at several places and in absence of any other data, I am using this data. If we take median value of 3% worldwide EB2 approvals are around 50 and so TSC+NSC approved 1600 cases in four working days of August (400 per day).
Median value is OK for reference, couple of places, it is quoted that 20,000 GC numbers are available for EB2. For 40 working days in Aug/Sep, it averages to 500 GC per day.
rameshvaid
04-09 04:30 PM
I came to Montreal for H1/H4 stamping for my wife and two sons. My interview date was 3/18 and they told me it will take abt. 10 days and now its almost over 20 days and no news from them. I am EB3-PD 8/03-I-140/EAD Approved. FP also done. Can you pls. let me know if they asked you any questions or you had any comunication with them after your interview? In my case they kept all our passports, Originals of our H1/H4/EAD approvals/Letter from the employer also.
I had also done the stamping from Toronto in 2005 without any problem. Is this a PIMS related issue?
ramesh
I had also done the stamping from Toronto in 2005 without any problem. Is this a PIMS related issue?
ramesh
2011 Charles V
hpandey
04-07 10:39 AM
Just got it. Right now.Thanks guys.
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Approval notice sent.
On April 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service.
If you have questions or concerns about your application or the case status results listed above, or if you have not received a decision from USCIS within the current processing time listed*, please contact USCIS Customer Service at (800) 375-5283.
and enjoy the freedom that you have now :-) Patience always pays !!
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Approval notice sent.
On April 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service.
If you have questions or concerns about your application or the case status results listed above, or if you have not received a decision from USCIS within the current processing time listed*, please contact USCIS Customer Service at (800) 375-5283.
and enjoy the freedom that you have now :-) Patience always pays !!
more...
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.
nixstor
10-25 08:46 AM
Yeah! You are right. I will post one too.
more...
zuhail
10-30 02:02 PM
I completely disagree with what gc_on_demand is saying.
Even as recently as this week, Congress has passed some immigration provisions that has been added to other major bills and Obama has signed them into law. I do not believe that Hispanic Caucus is simply blocking every immigration legislation until CIR- that's just BS.
Based on the statistics published by USCIS,
MurthyDotCom : USCIS Shares Useful Info in Pending I-485 Charts (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_pndchr.html)
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
I think passing this bill help will definitely help the EB2 category which would consequently make more visa numbers available for EB3 category.
I believe that IV should start a dedicated fund raising movement for lobbying efforts to help pass this bill.
Sri.
Even as recently as this week, Congress has passed some immigration provisions that has been added to other major bills and Obama has signed them into law. I do not believe that Hispanic Caucus is simply blocking every immigration legislation until CIR- that's just BS.
Based on the statistics published by USCIS,
MurthyDotCom : USCIS Shares Useful Info in Pending I-485 Charts (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_pndchr.html)
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
I think passing this bill help will definitely help the EB2 category which would consequently make more visa numbers available for EB3 category.
I believe that IV should start a dedicated fund raising movement for lobbying efforts to help pass this bill.
Sri.
2010 With Protestant Reformation
PDOCT05
10-31 09:54 AM
^^^bump^^^^^^^^^^
more...
pappu
05-31 08:27 AM
How can we reach the rest of ~496,000 skilled immigrants who are waiting for their green cards? where are they??
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=694&page=3
has some ideas all members can implement
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=694&page=3
has some ideas all members can implement
hair protestant reformation map. the protestant reformation
vsattri
07-14 12:12 PM
Question is when was the application posted. 11 th july seems to be the date they processed the application. Not necessarily the recpt date.
more...
skarthy
07-17 04:43 PM
e-filled.
Thanks
Can I call them and ask about it ? This is scary. My friends who applied after me got it and I'm moving in 2 weeks.
appreciate any suggestions.
Thanks
Can I call them and ask about it ? This is scary. My friends who applied after me got it and I'm moving in 2 weeks.
appreciate any suggestions.
hot (Compare with the map of
anil_temp
06-26 03:55 PM
for me company is paying for everything except medical..
more...
house protestant reformation map. the Protestant Reformation
WFGC2006
12-07 06:33 PM
please note: the final USCIS operating procedures relating to AC21 is stillborn eight years after the law was passed, which means the government can make the interpretation of AC21 loose or tight as it sees fit.
we can only hope for the best!!!
we can only hope for the best!!!
tattoo The Protestant Reformation; protestant reformation map.
unseenguy
11-30 08:48 PM
He is an Anti
more...
pictures Protestant Reformation in
whoever
01-22 12:24 PM
like the url of the site you read it at? I am wondering when those numbers were published -- i mean which year they were published? was there any mention of how many applications are still pending at bec?
dresses The Protestant Reformation
prabirmehta
03-22 11:25 AM
Thanks, I'll call Senator Chambliss' office and try to request a meeting.
more...
makeup protestant reformation map.
funny
07-26 02:09 PM
I agree.
Please change the title, Its going to scare hell out of a lot of people. It centainly did the trick for me.
Please change the title, Its going to scare hell out of a lot of people. It centainly did the trick for me.
girlfriend protestant reformation map. PROTESTANT REFORMATION and
mbawa2574
07-07 07:56 PM
IV core leadership has to change and so is the stratergy. Current Lobbying efforts have clearly not worked out. I call for elections to elect the new core team. All these conference calls and inaction is just wastage of time and things are getting worse. We need an aggressive stratergy and may need to take names and hit people openly to get our agenda pushed. IV leadership clearly lacks these skills.
hairstyles protestant reformation map. protestant reformation; protestant reformation
h1techSlave
07-15 10:39 AM
The reason for these kinds of unreasonable RFEs is simple - Improving the US economy; one RFE at a time.
In my understanding there is no rule or guidelines regarding usage of same photos more than once. The only restriction is that the photo should not be more than 6 months old. If I remember correctly, I have used the same photos for various purposes like Visa, EAD, AP etc.
When my AP came up for renewal my attorney asked to get new set of photos.
In addition my cousin's EAD application got RFE'ed to get new set of photos even though the photos were recent. The reason given was that they had used same photos to renew their visa few months back (less than 6 months).
Is USCIS coming up some new rule about photos being 'unused' ?? The guidelines say that photos should be recent (taken in last 6 months). However nowhere I do I see that the photos should be 'unused' previously ?
Anyone else had same experience ?
In my understanding there is no rule or guidelines regarding usage of same photos more than once. The only restriction is that the photo should not be more than 6 months old. If I remember correctly, I have used the same photos for various purposes like Visa, EAD, AP etc.
When my AP came up for renewal my attorney asked to get new set of photos.
In addition my cousin's EAD application got RFE'ed to get new set of photos even though the photos were recent. The reason given was that they had used same photos to renew their visa few months back (less than 6 months).
Is USCIS coming up some new rule about photos being 'unused' ?? The guidelines say that photos should be recent (taken in last 6 months). However nowhere I do I see that the photos should be 'unused' previously ?
Anyone else had same experience ?
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.
hoosier07
07-25 05:19 PM
Something does not sound right here. How can the employer "misplace" the upper portion of the approval notice? In the first place, why did he even separate the upper portion and the lower portion? He is supposed to give you the entire document as a single piece of paper.
Some thing really does not sound right here. By law, he is required to give you the approval notice.
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?
Some thing really does not sound right here. By law, he is required to give you the approval notice.
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?
No comments:
Post a Comment