suny_saini
07-22 06:14 AM
hello friends
hope u experienced guys can help me and advise me in my case:
my dad is a green card holder and a pernanent resident of US
me my mom and my younger bro were applied by my dad in E3 category.
abt two years ago we recieved a letter from DELHI-US EMBASSY abt some instructions abt visa. and at end there were names of travelling applicants and those were me , my mom and my brother.
now the Priority dates became current in june and we got a letter abt visa appointment and there were only two travelling applicants ( my mom and my brother)
my name was not there for interview.
on the day of interview i went with my family.
they took interview of my mom and bro and said everything is ok.
i was also there in waiting room and only i was allowed to talk and ask the officer at enquire
consular officer give my mom a notoce to present I140 and I824 approval notices. and they returned the passports of my mom and bro and told us to submit each applicant passport with the original approval notices.
i asked at lady at enquire that why they returned the passports?
and she replied that its all because my age problem and also they want to issue visa to all of us at same time.
so after u present the approval notice they will think and decide if i can be able to get visa or not.
then we have again submitted and also i submillted my passport with their.
can anybody help me and tell me wots gonna happen???
i cant wait of their responce.
here are some detials if u can check and calculate if i am elegible...
My current age - 21 yrs and 7 months
Age at the time priority date became current: (21 yrs - 8 days)= 20 years 11 months and 23 days
Priority date became current on 11 May http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3236.html
see date of posting at the end of page ie. 11 may
I-140 Filed: May20, 2003
Approved: October 8, 2003
Time taken : 5 monnths and 19 days
Three I-824 filed for Me, my Mother and my younger brother Filed ON: July 28 2005
Approved ON: Nov 7, 2005
Ucsis notified Nov 7, 2005 New Delhi consolate about there cases.
and we filled DS-230 and courier to Delhi US embassy.
Our dates were current near Nov 2005 but again they changed the dates and it became un current.
now dates are current again.
plz help me....
hope u experienced guys can help me and advise me in my case:
my dad is a green card holder and a pernanent resident of US
me my mom and my younger bro were applied by my dad in E3 category.
abt two years ago we recieved a letter from DELHI-US EMBASSY abt some instructions abt visa. and at end there were names of travelling applicants and those were me , my mom and my brother.
now the Priority dates became current in june and we got a letter abt visa appointment and there were only two travelling applicants ( my mom and my brother)
my name was not there for interview.
on the day of interview i went with my family.
they took interview of my mom and bro and said everything is ok.
i was also there in waiting room and only i was allowed to talk and ask the officer at enquire
consular officer give my mom a notoce to present I140 and I824 approval notices. and they returned the passports of my mom and bro and told us to submit each applicant passport with the original approval notices.
i asked at lady at enquire that why they returned the passports?
and she replied that its all because my age problem and also they want to issue visa to all of us at same time.
so after u present the approval notice they will think and decide if i can be able to get visa or not.
then we have again submitted and also i submillted my passport with their.
can anybody help me and tell me wots gonna happen???
i cant wait of their responce.
here are some detials if u can check and calculate if i am elegible...
My current age - 21 yrs and 7 months
Age at the time priority date became current: (21 yrs - 8 days)= 20 years 11 months and 23 days
Priority date became current on 11 May http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3236.html
see date of posting at the end of page ie. 11 may
I-140 Filed: May20, 2003
Approved: October 8, 2003
Time taken : 5 monnths and 19 days
Three I-824 filed for Me, my Mother and my younger brother Filed ON: July 28 2005
Approved ON: Nov 7, 2005
Ucsis notified Nov 7, 2005 New Delhi consolate about there cases.
and we filled DS-230 and courier to Delhi US embassy.
Our dates were current near Nov 2005 but again they changed the dates and it became un current.
now dates are current again.
plz help me....
wallpaper with inspirational quotes,
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.
div_bell_2003
01-12 06:41 PM
Approximately the same. My lawyer filed paper based for me and I e-filed for my wife around the same time , they came within 1 weeks of each other ( don't remember which came first ) , the only thing is , for e-filed EADs, you have to go to the nearest USCIS office for a biometrics , while paper based EADs have the pictures with the application.
thank you "div_bell_2003". e-file and paper renewal, does it take the same
processing time?
thank you "div_bell_2003". e-file and paper renewal, does it take the same
processing time?
2011 cowboys cheerleaders
bsbawa10
05-31 08:04 PM
Thanks so much .
more...
gc_lover
07-24 12:17 PM
Can I file concurrently I-140 and I-485 if the labor is approved but haven't received the hard copy? What do I need to attach to these applications to substitute for the hard copy?
If you have a screenshot of approval, you can use that to file concurrently!
I am in exact same situation, except I have already filed on July 2nd. I am not very sure about this whole thing, but some lawyers are saying this only applies to people filing from July 17 to Aug 17th, I dont know. I will keep my fingers crossed and see what will happen to my application.
If you have a screenshot of approval, you can use that to file concurrently!
I am in exact same situation, except I have already filed on July 2nd. I am not very sure about this whole thing, but some lawyers are saying this only applies to people filing from July 17 to Aug 17th, I dont know. I will keep my fingers crossed and see what will happen to my application.
pune_guy
06-05 07:43 PM
Hi,
Both, me and my wife, have EAD and AP. I am still working on H1 and she is not using her EAD (other than to obtain SSN).
We do not see her working for another year or so. I may switch jobs using AC21 and may do so using H1B transfer or EAD.
So here's my question:
1. Can I skip renewing her EAD and renew just mine?
2. Can we renew her EAD as and when we feel the need, which may be later than the expiry date of her current EAD?
I'd appreciate your thoughts on this matter.
Thanks
Both, me and my wife, have EAD and AP. I am still working on H1 and she is not using her EAD (other than to obtain SSN).
We do not see her working for another year or so. I may switch jobs using AC21 and may do so using H1B transfer or EAD.
So here's my question:
1. Can I skip renewing her EAD and renew just mine?
2. Can we renew her EAD as and when we feel the need, which may be later than the expiry date of her current EAD?
I'd appreciate your thoughts on this matter.
Thanks
more...
nixstor
10-27 04:06 PM
Nah.. I think the talk to power guys skim the whole thing and ask him questions. He didnt even ask him about these issues. Now its Sen Brownback
2010 Davidson myspace, cheerleading
whitecollarslave
02-08 02:52 PM
I'm not sure it will be taken up by AILA -- I was so surprised by the resistance I encountered when I asked a well known attorney with a blog (v. popular with IV members) to submit this question to the AILA committee which reviews topics for liason meetings, and it took several rounds of email and some very severe rhetoric from me to even get him to send it to the committee! I feel it is terrible that our self-professed advocates hesitate even to ASK a question, let alone propose specific reforms...
The deadline for submitting questions is Feb 15 -- so if you are interested, get in touch with your attorneys and send in the question. Maybe numbers will move them.
Can you provide some more information on the AILA liaison meetings? Excuse my ignorance but I have never heard of it before.
Can we ask AILA to support the letter campaign? Specifically, can we ask AILA to push for recapturing 218K unused visas and clarification on how they might be allocated, if recaptured?
Thanks!
The deadline for submitting questions is Feb 15 -- so if you are interested, get in touch with your attorneys and send in the question. Maybe numbers will move them.
Can you provide some more information on the AILA liaison meetings? Excuse my ignorance but I have never heard of it before.
Can we ask AILA to support the letter campaign? Specifically, can we ask AILA to push for recapturing 218K unused visas and clarification on how they might be allocated, if recaptured?
Thanks!
more...
Desiguy786
04-02 03:35 PM
Gurus/Attorneys,
My current 8th year H1 is valid until end of May 2007 from employer A, we applied for 9th year ext and got a big RFE. As a backup, can I transfer my H1 to employer B and get 1 year extension (until May 2008) based on my approved labor from employer A ??
Any inputs/suggestions are greatly appreciated!!
My current 8th year H1 is valid until end of May 2007 from employer A, we applied for 9th year ext and got a big RFE. As a backup, can I transfer my H1 to employer B and get 1 year extension (until May 2008) based on my approved labor from employer A ??
Any inputs/suggestions are greatly appreciated!!
hair for cheerleading quotes or
cgs
02-08 08:57 AM
Is there anything like this, if yes can you throw some light on it.
As far as I know for any L1 to become H1 needs to apply in the new H1 quota.
L1A is for managers and you actually have to work atleast one year outside the US to apply for a GC (L1A - GC)
L1B is most commonly used (abused). There is no minimum required pay and has no cap. Moving from L1B to H1b is a nightmare.
As far as I know for any L1 to become H1 needs to apply in the new H1 quota.
L1A is for managers and you actually have to work atleast one year outside the US to apply for a GC (L1A - GC)
L1B is most commonly used (abused). There is no minimum required pay and has no cap. Moving from L1B to H1b is a nightmare.
more...
samswas
01-21 11:17 AM
Thanks for your reply and I understand that AC21 can be used for job in same or similar occupation.
Since my Emp A (GC sponsor) agree to continue the GC process, why do i need to invoke AC21 with Emp B?
Vel
Your Emp A may say anything, but if he revokes your I-140 before you file AC-21, then you will be in trouble. It is always safe to file CA-21
Since my Emp A (GC sponsor) agree to continue the GC process, why do i need to invoke AC21 with Emp B?
Vel
Your Emp A may say anything, but if he revokes your I-140 before you file AC-21, then you will be in trouble. It is always safe to file CA-21
hot HAPPY WOMAN QUOTES
h1techSlave
01-05 11:57 AM
Is Eb3 --> Eb2 porting a wide spread phenomina?
Tough to predict due to porting done from EB3 to EB2. All old EB3 PDs that ported to EB2 will have priority over newer EB2 PDs
Tough to predict due to porting done from EB3 to EB2. All old EB3 PDs that ported to EB2 will have priority over newer EB2 PDs
more...
house her cheerleading squad at
Canadian_Dream
07-24 04:58 PM
I was in the same situation. My application sent on June 8, received June 11 was entered in the system in July second week while my spouse's application was entered in the system today. There seems to be some delay in processing June second week applications, this is just from my observations from various posts and following . Rest assured you will receive the receipt. I was panicked regarding my application whether it is returned or lost or denied.
When I looked at the I-485 adjudicators manual (available at USCIS website) I found out that all applications are entered in the system even if it is routed be returned back to the applicant for whatever reason. It is simply not possible to not to have an application in the system. So I guess it is matter of time before you will get the receipt. Check with USCIS customer service reps, they are very friendly. If you don't hear anything in another day or two open a service request. This was advised to me by USCIS customer service rep. It usually take 30 days to receive a response but at least you will be assured that someone is looking at it. NSC has issued a notice saying all the applications will be receipted by Aug 01, so wait till then and if you don't hear from them refile the whole thing again as a last resort.
Hope this helps. Good Luck !!!
Hi ,
Our attorney mailed our applications to NSC on 7thJune and thru USPS tracking number, we know it has reached NSC on11th June early morning. Have called NSC 5 times in last 3weeks, but every time, I am told our data is not in the system.... Our attorney is asking us to hold on for some more time, till he hears from his bank if the checks have been encashed??? But till now, no news...
Kindly let us know, if anybody who have filed at same time and have not yet received any update???
Thanks in advance!!!!
When I looked at the I-485 adjudicators manual (available at USCIS website) I found out that all applications are entered in the system even if it is routed be returned back to the applicant for whatever reason. It is simply not possible to not to have an application in the system. So I guess it is matter of time before you will get the receipt. Check with USCIS customer service reps, they are very friendly. If you don't hear anything in another day or two open a service request. This was advised to me by USCIS customer service rep. It usually take 30 days to receive a response but at least you will be assured that someone is looking at it. NSC has issued a notice saying all the applications will be receipted by Aug 01, so wait till then and if you don't hear from them refile the whole thing again as a last resort.
Hope this helps. Good Luck !!!
Hi ,
Our attorney mailed our applications to NSC on 7thJune and thru USPS tracking number, we know it has reached NSC on11th June early morning. Have called NSC 5 times in last 3weeks, but every time, I am told our data is not in the system.... Our attorney is asking us to hold on for some more time, till he hears from his bank if the checks have been encashed??? But till now, no news...
Kindly let us know, if anybody who have filed at same time and have not yet received any update???
Thanks in advance!!!!
tattoo wallpaper quotes on life.
willwin
05-14 11:03 AM
Is there anyone out there pursuing CP and already working in the USA?
In today's economy/job market, it is a nightmare not to have the protection of EAD.
Is there anyway we can get EAD for people in CP queue? Issuing EAD for those CP filers who are already in the US on work (H1B) VISA - is that even a possibility?
Any thoughts?
In today's economy/job market, it is a nightmare not to have the protection of EAD.
Is there anyway we can get EAD for people in CP queue? Issuing EAD for those CP filers who are already in the US on work (H1B) VISA - is that even a possibility?
Any thoughts?
more...
pictures Quotes from Volume 28
pamith
01-30 02:49 AM
Congrats
dresses COWBOYS CHEERLEADERS, UMM.
ysnraju
12-07 12:02 AM
for my 8th Year extension I applied on 16th Nov.2007
and got approval notice on 28th Nov.2007 with 1 Yr extension.
Actually based on December bulletin my attorney asked for 3 yrs. but got 1 yr. as in Nov my PD is current.
Off-course on 30th my I485 is approved.
So there is no doubt your attorney is so wrong.......
and got approval notice on 28th Nov.2007 with 1 Yr extension.
Actually based on December bulletin my attorney asked for 3 yrs. but got 1 yr. as in Nov my PD is current.
Off-course on 30th my I485 is approved.
So there is no doubt your attorney is so wrong.......
more...
makeup (cheerleading quotes MySpace
go_guy123
03-12 01:12 PM
In addition to the above questions:
USICS had stopped the movement of EB2/EB3 dates by not allotting visas and on the other hand they had also added too many restrictions on H1 extension [like valid Purchase Order for all visa extension], no matter you have approved I-140. These days they give H1 extn for only that period of time till PO is valid. That means if the PO is valid for 4 monnths one gets H1 extn for 4 months only and if it 6 mths then extension for only 6 months. This means that after 4,6 months one again has to apply for H1/H4 extensions and again pay all those fees.
This really sucks !!
Is the intention of all these laws is to catch fraud or kick out all immigrants from this country ?
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Yes, to some extent they do want to end the use of H1B for contract related jobs.
Benching, percentage basis etc were not in H1B rules. Now they are trying to crack down on all that. They are trying to make the H1B-body shopper business model un-viable.
USICS had stopped the movement of EB2/EB3 dates by not allotting visas and on the other hand they had also added too many restrictions on H1 extension [like valid Purchase Order for all visa extension], no matter you have approved I-140. These days they give H1 extn for only that period of time till PO is valid. That means if the PO is valid for 4 monnths one gets H1 extn for 4 months only and if it 6 mths then extension for only 6 months. This means that after 4,6 months one again has to apply for H1/H4 extensions and again pay all those fees.
This really sucks !!
Is the intention of all these laws is to catch fraud or kick out all immigrants from this country ?
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Yes, to some extent they do want to end the use of H1B for contract related jobs.
Benching, percentage basis etc were not in H1B rules. Now they are trying to crack down on all that. They are trying to make the H1B-body shopper business model un-viable.
girlfriend cheerleaders hosted Quote
psaxena
05-11 04:15 PM
Guys,
Read till the end....
I know with this thread I'll get 100000 red dots, but anyways never mind...
I see the immigration portal when the process on my other machine is running and I have nothing else to do. But thats irrelevant on why and what I do.
The point is , I see everyone coming up with 100000 different ideas, and then there is a never ending thread of debates on should we do it or do not. pros and cons, blah blah blah. Debates are good , as it results the best of both parties views. But I see a trend here which is , the discussion happens and then the idea goes down the flush. I never see,
kinda list or something like that, which says these were the action items selected by the IV team and this is the status of the same. Seems to me everyone comes up with something and discuss and they forget about it.
I think a bit of Project management is required to be in place. also a workflow with the option to introduce the idea then debate and a voting and once thats done , if idea is selected it should move on to action item category else if the idea is in the process of debate the list should show as the status 'Pending in Process'.
At the end of the day , at a glance everyone will have the visibility of, where do we stand with all the ideas and how far are we with selected ideas as action item and results of it.
Well I think this is also an idea and will now subject to debate and then lets see if it goes off the flush or some workflow and new menu items appear on the IV.
Nothing negative , but the IV members and views are to scattered, specially with the lack of ownership and leadership its like headless chicken running is all directions, and I totally understand the admin of this group and website are also guys like us , who got jobs and family and tons of different things to do, but now I think there is a need to revisit and see how the division of the labor can be done and responsibilities are assigned so that not just a few guys gets the pressure of getting the things done, but a joint responsibility like an organization( not just a word but in real sense) gets the mission accomplished.
Well the processing is complete I'll get back to my other screen now..
PS: No intentions to hurt or demoralize anyone or any effort. Just thought a little enforcement and leadership is required so thought of mentioning it. ( My english is not so great so please pardon me)
<B>The same thread was posted with a different heading on the forum with the heading " Status Update on Action Items"</B> . I was trying to do the analysis on what kind of readers does this portal has. The readers who really wanna do something or just timepass.
And if you are reading this and skipped reading the other one, you are one those thousand who do not wanna do anything but just sit and timepass and when get frustated, open a thread and vent out frustation with some idea.
The reason behind this conclusion is because, if you want to see a difference and to see where are you heading to in terms of what is done and what is to be done, you would have open the other thread. Makes sense?
__________________
Thanks
Live well do good
Read till the end....
I know with this thread I'll get 100000 red dots, but anyways never mind...
I see the immigration portal when the process on my other machine is running and I have nothing else to do. But thats irrelevant on why and what I do.
The point is , I see everyone coming up with 100000 different ideas, and then there is a never ending thread of debates on should we do it or do not. pros and cons, blah blah blah. Debates are good , as it results the best of both parties views. But I see a trend here which is , the discussion happens and then the idea goes down the flush. I never see,
kinda list or something like that, which says these were the action items selected by the IV team and this is the status of the same. Seems to me everyone comes up with something and discuss and they forget about it.
I think a bit of Project management is required to be in place. also a workflow with the option to introduce the idea then debate and a voting and once thats done , if idea is selected it should move on to action item category else if the idea is in the process of debate the list should show as the status 'Pending in Process'.
At the end of the day , at a glance everyone will have the visibility of, where do we stand with all the ideas and how far are we with selected ideas as action item and results of it.
Well I think this is also an idea and will now subject to debate and then lets see if it goes off the flush or some workflow and new menu items appear on the IV.
Nothing negative , but the IV members and views are to scattered, specially with the lack of ownership and leadership its like headless chicken running is all directions, and I totally understand the admin of this group and website are also guys like us , who got jobs and family and tons of different things to do, but now I think there is a need to revisit and see how the division of the labor can be done and responsibilities are assigned so that not just a few guys gets the pressure of getting the things done, but a joint responsibility like an organization( not just a word but in real sense) gets the mission accomplished.
Well the processing is complete I'll get back to my other screen now..
PS: No intentions to hurt or demoralize anyone or any effort. Just thought a little enforcement and leadership is required so thought of mentioning it. ( My english is not so great so please pardon me)
<B>The same thread was posted with a different heading on the forum with the heading " Status Update on Action Items"</B> . I was trying to do the analysis on what kind of readers does this portal has. The readers who really wanna do something or just timepass.
And if you are reading this and skipped reading the other one, you are one those thousand who do not wanna do anything but just sit and timepass and when get frustated, open a thread and vent out frustation with some idea.
The reason behind this conclusion is because, if you want to see a difference and to see where are you heading to in terms of what is done and what is to be done, you would have open the other thread. Makes sense?
__________________
Thanks
Live well do good
hairstyles athletic quotes tweets
floridasun
01-12 11:22 AM
dude.. stop spitting garbage especially when u dont know my situation
lazycis
02-14 10:13 AM
From my experience, if you file EAD/AP by yourself, all communications regarding EAD/AP will go to you. No need to file G-28. If you want all I-485 communication rerouted to you, you need to file G-28 and put yourself as a representative.
I could not find age restriction for EAD, you may try to file. However there are legal restrictions on child labor in US so I really doubt they will issue EAD for a minor (under 14 years). My friend cound not get EAD for 12 year old.
I could not find age restriction for EAD, you may try to file. However there are legal restrictions on child labor in US so I really doubt they will issue EAD for a minor (under 14 years). My friend cound not get EAD for 12 year old.
Rockford
07-16 12:39 PM
I called them this morning and IO told me that my file has been assigned to an officer. What does this mean? Can anyone tell me?
Thanks
Can you share your PD and when did you file I485 ?
Thanks
Can you share your PD and when did you file I485 ?
No comments:
Post a Comment