chmur
07-26 01:05 PM
If I am not wrong, it is more to do with a rule interpretation change by USCIS.
Insuppose the most feasible solution for the ones that are really bothered and have a chance is to do a EB2 porting. EB3 is like the slow lane. EB2 also used to be like that but benefited from the change in spillover.
EB3 best chance is to have the Visa Recapture which is already being pursued or have some other legislative fix.
----
Not a lawyer.
EB3 May 2006
Contributed $100
EB3-I 's best chance in the current context , in the order of faster results,
1. Port to EB2 , If possible
2. Lobby to change spill over distribution. USCIS has been inconsistent over the years. So we need to lobby hard and impress upon them that this year distribution algorithm is unfair .who knows it can change again next year , this time a more balanced one ..
3. Recapture effort: This is a big one and we need to support carry out the tasks assigned by IV and other biggies .
IMO, No genuinely concerned fellow mate should advise EB3-I's to support only recapture effort.
Insuppose the most feasible solution for the ones that are really bothered and have a chance is to do a EB2 porting. EB3 is like the slow lane. EB2 also used to be like that but benefited from the change in spillover.
EB3 best chance is to have the Visa Recapture which is already being pursued or have some other legislative fix.
----
Not a lawyer.
EB3 May 2006
Contributed $100
EB3-I 's best chance in the current context , in the order of faster results,
1. Port to EB2 , If possible
2. Lobby to change spill over distribution. USCIS has been inconsistent over the years. So we need to lobby hard and impress upon them that this year distribution algorithm is unfair .who knows it can change again next year , this time a more balanced one ..
3. Recapture effort: This is a big one and we need to support carry out the tasks assigned by IV and other biggies .
IMO, No genuinely concerned fellow mate should advise EB3-I's to support only recapture effort.
wallpaper at US Open. Rory McIlroy
sukhwinderd
02-02 08:40 AM
can we have fliers ready (as someone suggested is some other post), to increase aawareness, so that we can post it in indian stores, gurudwaras, mandirs etc.
psk79
09-18 07:17 PM
Finally, EAD card ordered on principal application.... Spouse's was ordered and received 9/12. Finally, mine was PRODUCTION ORDERED this evening.... Any others in the same boat, don't panic... they are doing them in random order....
No word on FP or AP yet.. However, any address changers, make hte online change and they are very fast... I changed my address and the 2second business day I had two letters in the mail saying that the address has been updated on my and spouse's 765 applications.. couple of days later one more that 485 address was updated and after that nothing....
No word on FP or AP yet.. However, any address changers, make hte online change and they are very fast... I changed my address and the 2second business day I had two letters in the mail saying that the address has been updated on my and spouse's 765 applications.. couple of days later one more that 485 address was updated and after that nothing....
2011 Rory McIlroy
ThinkTwice
07-19 07:00 PM
UDAMAN!
count me in also ....
count me in also ....
more...
walking_dude
10-08 04:57 PM
gjoe/and others,
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
buddyinsd
08-25 05:06 PM
What about ur case? Is that assigned to an officer as well?
Any idea how long it takes for a decision once it has been assigned to an officer?
My wife's case was assigned to an officer on Aug 11th.
Any idea how long it takes for a decision once it has been assigned to an officer?
My wife's case was assigned to an officer on Aug 11th.
more...
Winner
02-09 08:32 PM
Did you all see Donald Trumps answer to Piers Morgans question in Piers Morgan tonight program on CNN? that was not a yotal surprise, but after his talk about China and India, that was a little bit surprising.
2010 Rory McIlroy, of Northern
stucklabor
06-26 03:20 PM
I am sorry stucklabour but a traffic/speeding violation is a misdemeanour and not breaking the law. Being in this country illegally is actually breaking the law. Now i am not going to get suckered into a whole legals v/s illegals debate, but at some level i do feel that undocumented workers HAVE broken the law. Besides the argument that "everyone does it" really doesnt cut it. 10 wrongs do not make 1 right. If you look at the punishment for the 2 things a speeding violation leads to a simple fine, a violation of Visa leads to deportation.
Umm, Eb3_Nepa, speeding is breaking the law. A speed limit is the law. In pointing out that a speeder is fined but an illegal immigrant is deported, you are pointing out the difference in punishment for breaking the law. The punishment is man's decree, nothing more, nothing less. One could argue that a speeder can cause more harm to society (by driving way faster than conditions permit, for instance) than an illegal immigrant. Yes, an illegal immigrant is breaking the law, but who knows what we would do if we had a bad life and made $1 a day and someone promises a better paying job in some other country. So let us not point fingers here, but focus instead on the value we add.
You are getting into this discussion late and I have edited/deleted posts, but from my comments you have an idea of what was said. It wasn't productive.
Santosh_gc, I appreciate your sentiment. It is possible that my argument had a logical fallacy but let us focus on better things and move on.
Umm, Eb3_Nepa, speeding is breaking the law. A speed limit is the law. In pointing out that a speeder is fined but an illegal immigrant is deported, you are pointing out the difference in punishment for breaking the law. The punishment is man's decree, nothing more, nothing less. One could argue that a speeder can cause more harm to society (by driving way faster than conditions permit, for instance) than an illegal immigrant. Yes, an illegal immigrant is breaking the law, but who knows what we would do if we had a bad life and made $1 a day and someone promises a better paying job in some other country. So let us not point fingers here, but focus instead on the value we add.
You are getting into this discussion late and I have edited/deleted posts, but from my comments you have an idea of what was said. It wasn't productive.
Santosh_gc, I appreciate your sentiment. It is possible that my argument had a logical fallacy but let us focus on better things and move on.
more...
HOPE_GC_SOON
07-29 09:08 AM
Guys:
Further to my following posting::: Just to share an Update. I got an LUD " on Jul 28 we ordered Card Production" for my EAD Renewal. Details of 1 yr or 2yrs are not known till we see the actual card.
I will post any updates
thanks:)
Gurus:
Does anyone, who has PD getting current (under EB2- I/C) during Aug/Sept. got their EAD Renewed, and cards received. ?? If so, what's your EAD-Renewal Appln Date / RD and Cards Received Date.
I suspect, USCIS is NOT issuing EAD Renewals, to probable Current PD holders, any more. :D hopefully. This is a good Sign, if true. Does anybody agree with me.. Let's Party out. :)
This is becuase, my EAD Renewal Appln. RD is June 18th.. and till date I have NO LUD of whatsoever, and PD would be current during Aug.bullentin
Is this something to cheer:)
Further to my following posting::: Just to share an Update. I got an LUD " on Jul 28 we ordered Card Production" for my EAD Renewal. Details of 1 yr or 2yrs are not known till we see the actual card.
I will post any updates
thanks:)
Gurus:
Does anyone, who has PD getting current (under EB2- I/C) during Aug/Sept. got their EAD Renewed, and cards received. ?? If so, what's your EAD-Renewal Appln Date / RD and Cards Received Date.
I suspect, USCIS is NOT issuing EAD Renewals, to probable Current PD holders, any more. :D hopefully. This is a good Sign, if true. Does anybody agree with me.. Let's Party out. :)
This is becuase, my EAD Renewal Appln. RD is June 18th.. and till date I have NO LUD of whatsoever, and PD would be current during Aug.bullentin
Is this something to cheer:)
hair wins US Open. Rory McIlroy
Janisaris
09-07 03:53 PM
Guys,
Since I have not received my receipts or my checks are not cleared, I am hoping that my case got transfered to TSC or CSC. Nebraska is now producing receipts for applications filed on the first week of August. I see this big void from July 3rd to July 20th that people did not get their receipts. How many of you got receipts in this time frame from NSC?
Since I have not received my receipts or my checks are not cleared, I am hoping that my case got transfered to TSC or CSC. Nebraska is now producing receipts for applications filed on the first week of August. I see this big void from July 3rd to July 20th that people did not get their receipts. How many of you got receipts in this time frame from NSC?
more...
skark
08-19 01:09 PM
I did! All they're saying is to wait till 90 days are up and call back or take infopass appt!:mad:
same for me tooo...
I also didn't apply AP..
Did you call TSC?
I am thinking to call them...they might request from NSC and this way those guys might pull my case out from black hole...
and approve I485...BIG IF ...if i m lucky...
same for me tooo...
I also didn't apply AP..
Did you call TSC?
I am thinking to call them...they might request from NSC and this way those guys might pull my case out from black hole...
and approve I485...BIG IF ...if i m lucky...
hot The home club of Rory McIlroy
Jimi_Hendrix
12-13 11:54 AM
I posted to topic "My concern- Skill in 2009"...then came proud american..derailed us off track and then we forgot our route....now back to the route....what action are we talking to intorduce this Eb interm relief Bill in senate in Jan..I think we need an input from Core members about how to proceed here..
Each of us write to all out state senators and also important once like Nance pelosi, Mccain..so on...about providing some non-contraversial releif...we need to mention those and send LEGIBLE HAND WRITTEN LETTERS without spelling mistakes and send it fedex.....Send it during Chirstmas ...dot forget to mention God Bless America...just explain in simple words that we have been waiting for some relief from 2001 and have not seen any...please consider passing these non-contraversial issuses....I think they are reasonable and would agree....also mention that we have been dodged like a football saying skill/CIR and so on....
Better yet a skillfull person writing this and all of us using this...
Target is to intorduce the EB interm bill by End of Jan
Yes let us get back on track. Core members please respond with comments about interim relief in January.
Each of us write to all out state senators and also important once like Nance pelosi, Mccain..so on...about providing some non-contraversial releif...we need to mention those and send LEGIBLE HAND WRITTEN LETTERS without spelling mistakes and send it fedex.....Send it during Chirstmas ...dot forget to mention God Bless America...just explain in simple words that we have been waiting for some relief from 2001 and have not seen any...please consider passing these non-contraversial issuses....I think they are reasonable and would agree....also mention that we have been dodged like a football saying skill/CIR and so on....
Better yet a skillfull person writing this and all of us using this...
Target is to intorduce the EB interm bill by End of Jan
Yes let us get back on track. Core members please respond with comments about interim relief in January.
more...
house Congrats to Rory McIlroy the
vbkris77
07-19 10:49 PM
I am starting this new thread to discuss about EB visas spillover usage based on oldest priority date irrespective of category/country. Currently the spillover happens vertically(a top down approach) from EB1 -> EB2 -> EB3...etc. Instead it should be first used on cases with oldest priority date. This will not only give a good move to clear the backlog but will also be a fair rule for those who are patiently waiting in queue for a long time. I wrote my concern about this to my local congressman. I also request each one of you, who is impacted by this, or who is interested to help us out, to kindly contact your local congressman/woman to express your concern. In turn they can contact USCIS to implement this fair rule to help us all out.
Even though I am waiting under EB2, I support this initiative. However INA clearly tells CIS/DoS to follow their current approach. Otherwise, this would have been in our first question to administration. Read below the text from INA with emphasis added.
Now I don't think it is fair. So I think we need to ask IV Core to analyze the proposal of adding the required text to CIR to make the process level playing for everyone. Recapture of visas coupled with removal of country limits would actually clear the current backlog. But to avoid future backlog I think it is only fair to make Spillover of the visas available beyond 28.6 % of visas available for any category be applied to the applicants with oldest priority date irrespective of the priority category.
INA Sec 203
(b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C):
(A) Aliens with extraordinary ability. - An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation,
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability, and
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the United States.
(B) Outstanding professors and researchers. -An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien is recognized internationally as outstanding in a specific academic area,
(ii) the alien has at least 3 years of experience in teaching or research in the academic area, and
(iii) the alien seeks to enter the United States-
(I) for a tenured position (or tenure-track position) within a university or institution of higher education to teach in the academic area,
(II) for a comparable position with a university or institution of higher education to conduct research in the area, or
(III) for a comparable position to conduct research in the area with a department, division, or institute of a private employer, if the department, division, or institute employs at least 3 persons full-time in research activities and has achieved documented accomplishments in an academic field.
(C) Certain multinational executives and managers. An alien is described in this subparagraph if the alien, in the 3 years preceding the time of the alien's application for classification and admission into the United States under this subparagraph, has been employed for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation or other legal entity or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof and the alien seeks to enter the United States in order to continue to render services to the same employer or to a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in a capacity that is managerial or executive.
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraph (1), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, an d whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
(B) (i) 1/ 1a/ Subject to clause (ii), the Attorney General may, when the Attorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States.
(ii) (I) The Attorney General shall grant a national interest waiver pursuant to clause (i) on behalf of any alien physician with respect to whom a petition for preference classification has been filed under subparagraph (A) if--
(aa) the alien physician agrees to work full time as a physician in an area or areas designated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services as having a shortage of health care professionals or at a health care facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; and
(bb) a Federal agency or a department of public health in any State has previously determined that the alien physician's work in such an area or at such facility was in the public interest.
USCIS - I-Link Reference (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD&CH=act)
Even though I am waiting under EB2, I support this initiative. However INA clearly tells CIS/DoS to follow their current approach. Otherwise, this would have been in our first question to administration. Read below the text from INA with emphasis added.
Now I don't think it is fair. So I think we need to ask IV Core to analyze the proposal of adding the required text to CIR to make the process level playing for everyone. Recapture of visas coupled with removal of country limits would actually clear the current backlog. But to avoid future backlog I think it is only fair to make Spillover of the visas available beyond 28.6 % of visas available for any category be applied to the applicants with oldest priority date irrespective of the priority category.
INA Sec 203
(b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C):
(A) Aliens with extraordinary ability. - An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation,
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability, and
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the United States.
(B) Outstanding professors and researchers. -An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien is recognized internationally as outstanding in a specific academic area,
(ii) the alien has at least 3 years of experience in teaching or research in the academic area, and
(iii) the alien seeks to enter the United States-
(I) for a tenured position (or tenure-track position) within a university or institution of higher education to teach in the academic area,
(II) for a comparable position with a university or institution of higher education to conduct research in the area, or
(III) for a comparable position to conduct research in the area with a department, division, or institute of a private employer, if the department, division, or institute employs at least 3 persons full-time in research activities and has achieved documented accomplishments in an academic field.
(C) Certain multinational executives and managers. An alien is described in this subparagraph if the alien, in the 3 years preceding the time of the alien's application for classification and admission into the United States under this subparagraph, has been employed for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation or other legal entity or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof and the alien seeks to enter the United States in order to continue to render services to the same employer or to a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in a capacity that is managerial or executive.
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraph (1), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, an d whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
(B) (i) 1/ 1a/ Subject to clause (ii), the Attorney General may, when the Attorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States.
(ii) (I) The Attorney General shall grant a national interest waiver pursuant to clause (i) on behalf of any alien physician with respect to whom a petition for preference classification has been filed under subparagraph (A) if--
(aa) the alien physician agrees to work full time as a physician in an area or areas designated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services as having a shortage of health care professionals or at a health care facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; and
(bb) a Federal agency or a department of public health in any State has previously determined that the alien physician's work in such an area or at such facility was in the public interest.
USCIS - I-Link Reference (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD&CH=act)
tattoo rory mcilroy us open pictures.
greenrohit
11-18 07:24 PM
Done!
more...
pictures USA; Rory McIlroy checks
andycool
08-20 01:23 PM
Ha ha Congrats....
Story of my life. I complain about delay with my application. Someone joins me and tells me they are in the same boat and the very next day that someone leaves the boat and jumps into "greener" pastures. Everyone is leaving the boat and I seem to be left out :(
Who else are in my boat? (Application with an officer for over 2 weeks and still status = "Initial Review")
Me....
SR ...on Aug 02 ...Response ..> Under review ...wait 60 days
Info pas...on Aug 06...> with officer wait 30 days..
Story of my life. I complain about delay with my application. Someone joins me and tells me they are in the same boat and the very next day that someone leaves the boat and jumps into "greener" pastures. Everyone is leaving the boat and I seem to be left out :(
Who else are in my boat? (Application with an officer for over 2 weeks and still status = "Initial Review")
Me....
SR ...on Aug 02 ...Response ..> Under review ...wait 60 days
Info pas...on Aug 06...> with officer wait 30 days..
dresses Rory#39;s 62 was shot at a course
kg318
04-23 10:00 PM
Your case is not very clear..How can attroney can advice without reviewing the non-compete agreement?
Non-compete Agreements in New Jersey
Should you sign that non-compete agreement?
It has become fashionable for employers of all types and sizes to require their employees to sign non-compete agreements. These agreements range from very narrow to very broad in scope. A non-compete may bar you from working for a competitor, using or disclosing trade secrets or other confidential information, soliciting customers or recruiting the your employer�s customers. These restrictions generally last from a few months to a few years. Because signing such an agreement can severely restrict your future employment options, you (and your attorney) should review it closely before doing so.
Can you be fired for refusing to sign that non-compete agreement?
Yes, according to the Supreme Court of New Jersey. See Maw v. Advanced Clinical Communications, 179 N.J. 439 (2004).
Will a New Jersey court enforce your non-compete agreement?
Do not make the mistake of thinking that you can sign an agreement and ignore it later. New Jersey Courts routinely enforce non-compete agreements that are �reasonable� in scope. A non-compete agreement will generally be considered reasonable if it (1) protects the legitimate interests of the employer; (2) does not impose an undue hardship on the employee; and (3) is not injurious to the public.
What will happen if you have signed a non-compete agreement that is not �reasonable�?
If the geographic and temporal restrictions in your non-compete agreement exceed the boundaries necessary to protect your employer, a New Jersey court may modify the agreement by reducing those restrictions to make the agreement reasonable. See Solari Industries v. Malady, 55 N.J. 571 (1970).
Guyz, i met attorney. got copy of non compete agreement from a co-worker. I feel kind of releived after what he said.
As per him, every non-compete agreement that is signed cannot be neccessarily enforced in the court of law. If the sole purpose is to avoid ordinary competition, it is unreasonable and unenforceable. If the agreement is ever challenged in court, the most important question, which will be posed from the Judge to the employer, is "What is the legitimate business purpose that is served by this non-compete agreement?"
Now as h1b employees, as every one knows we r not the key personnel in the company. we do not carry with us any trade secrets or confidential information which might harm their business.
AS per him the higher up the "food chain" an employee is at a company, the more willing courts are to enforce non-compete agreements. Upper level employees are typically exposed to more confidential, trade secret, strategic and other information that gives a company a competitive advantage in the market place. The lower down the food chain an employee is, the less likely a court is to enforce non-compete and non-solicitation terms.
Also non competes always have to give some profits to the employee, say a paid vacation, bonus or somethign like that. An employer cannot
just make the employee sign it to restrict him from making better living and not give anything in return....
Seems like these things are favourable to all the h1b employees.
If any employer is claiming non compete to hold the consultant to his company, then even he should not take employees from competetive companies..... But r they doing it???????? We all know the answer.... IT consulting businesses run like that.
Non-compete Agreements in New Jersey
Should you sign that non-compete agreement?
It has become fashionable for employers of all types and sizes to require their employees to sign non-compete agreements. These agreements range from very narrow to very broad in scope. A non-compete may bar you from working for a competitor, using or disclosing trade secrets or other confidential information, soliciting customers or recruiting the your employer�s customers. These restrictions generally last from a few months to a few years. Because signing such an agreement can severely restrict your future employment options, you (and your attorney) should review it closely before doing so.
Can you be fired for refusing to sign that non-compete agreement?
Yes, according to the Supreme Court of New Jersey. See Maw v. Advanced Clinical Communications, 179 N.J. 439 (2004).
Will a New Jersey court enforce your non-compete agreement?
Do not make the mistake of thinking that you can sign an agreement and ignore it later. New Jersey Courts routinely enforce non-compete agreements that are �reasonable� in scope. A non-compete agreement will generally be considered reasonable if it (1) protects the legitimate interests of the employer; (2) does not impose an undue hardship on the employee; and (3) is not injurious to the public.
What will happen if you have signed a non-compete agreement that is not �reasonable�?
If the geographic and temporal restrictions in your non-compete agreement exceed the boundaries necessary to protect your employer, a New Jersey court may modify the agreement by reducing those restrictions to make the agreement reasonable. See Solari Industries v. Malady, 55 N.J. 571 (1970).
Guyz, i met attorney. got copy of non compete agreement from a co-worker. I feel kind of releived after what he said.
As per him, every non-compete agreement that is signed cannot be neccessarily enforced in the court of law. If the sole purpose is to avoid ordinary competition, it is unreasonable and unenforceable. If the agreement is ever challenged in court, the most important question, which will be posed from the Judge to the employer, is "What is the legitimate business purpose that is served by this non-compete agreement?"
Now as h1b employees, as every one knows we r not the key personnel in the company. we do not carry with us any trade secrets or confidential information which might harm their business.
AS per him the higher up the "food chain" an employee is at a company, the more willing courts are to enforce non-compete agreements. Upper level employees are typically exposed to more confidential, trade secret, strategic and other information that gives a company a competitive advantage in the market place. The lower down the food chain an employee is, the less likely a court is to enforce non-compete and non-solicitation terms.
Also non competes always have to give some profits to the employee, say a paid vacation, bonus or somethign like that. An employer cannot
just make the employee sign it to restrict him from making better living and not give anything in return....
Seems like these things are favourable to all the h1b employees.
If any employer is claiming non compete to hold the consultant to his company, then even he should not take employees from competetive companies..... But r they doing it???????? We all know the answer.... IT consulting businesses run like that.
more...
makeup Rory McIlroy shoots a 65 to
for_gc
11-17 03:59 PM
Done!
Thanks IV
Thanks IV
girlfriend is of winning the US Open.
jsb
09-05 10:50 AM
...
My question to you is " Will TSC send the receipt number documnets directly to me or to my Attorney?"
Thanks
You authorized your attorney to be your legal rep (form G-28), so receipts will go to him/her
My question to you is " Will TSC send the receipt number documnets directly to me or to my Attorney?"
Thanks
You authorized your attorney to be your legal rep (form G-28), so receipts will go to him/her
hairstyles Rory McIlroy#39;s earnings to top
cal97
11-07 05:54 PM
I took an infopass appointment today. The IO sent an e-mail to NSC after taking details like DOB, address etc. for me and my wife.
btw, FP for us has been scheduled. Looks like they have some kind of a queue for that but a notice has not been sent out.
So that was it. Am going to wait it out patiently.
I had taken an infopass appointment after filing an SR. All the IO said was I should call NSC. I don't think the IO's at the local USCIS office can issue FP notices.
Shall try again sometime this week or next and update the same here. I am a NSC->CSC->NSC transferee.
btw, FP for us has been scheduled. Looks like they have some kind of a queue for that but a notice has not been sent out.
So that was it. Am going to wait it out patiently.
I had taken an infopass appointment after filing an SR. All the IO said was I should call NSC. I don't think the IO's at the local USCIS office can issue FP notices.
Shall try again sometime this week or next and update the same here. I am a NSC->CSC->NSC transferee.
EADplease
09-20 04:13 PM
I just called USCIS. The woman was polite but she told me there is nothing she can tell me since it is still within 90 days and she cannot tell me the receipt number. :mad:
I gues it depends on who you talk to.
Thank you very much!
We're anxiously waiting for the receipt notice in the mail...
I gues it depends on who you talk to.
Thank you very much!
We're anxiously waiting for the receipt notice in the mail...
aquarianf
04-23 12:21 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 saying the 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
I just read first page of this thread and would advice that don't follow most of reply because they are lawyers or they have not gone through the experience you are going through. $4000 may not be big amount compared to hassle of law suite , piece of mind or the amount of increase you may have received by switching employer. I know a close person who had gone through exactly same situation in NJ and had to pay 12,000 to settle the case. I have seen bunch of people in same situation and my friend always adviced them to stay away from law suite. If your current employer is not big then there are greater chances that it will turn away from you in case of law suite.
If you are not working with same client that you were working when you were in company A then non-compete may not hold against you.
Also can you get in writing from you current employer that they will support you in case of law suite?
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 saying the 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
I just read first page of this thread and would advice that don't follow most of reply because they are lawyers or they have not gone through the experience you are going through. $4000 may not be big amount compared to hassle of law suite , piece of mind or the amount of increase you may have received by switching employer. I know a close person who had gone through exactly same situation in NJ and had to pay 12,000 to settle the case. I have seen bunch of people in same situation and my friend always adviced them to stay away from law suite. If your current employer is not big then there are greater chances that it will turn away from you in case of law suite.
If you are not working with same client that you were working when you were in company A then non-compete may not hold against you.
Also can you get in writing from you current employer that they will support you in case of law suite?
No comments:
Post a Comment