gsarkar
01-31 07:00 AM
Dear members,
I want to consult an employment/labor lawyer with regards to an employment agreement that I have signed with a desi consulting company in US. They have sponsored an H1b for me which I am yet to get stamped. I am in India right now and wanted to talk to a Labor lawyer who could tell me the effects of not joining this employer given that there are certain terms and conditions stated in the agreement. Could you suggest me some law firm in US where one can speak to a lawyer on the phone for a reasonable amount of money and seek legal advice.
Thanks
I want to consult an employment/labor lawyer with regards to an employment agreement that I have signed with a desi consulting company in US. They have sponsored an H1b for me which I am yet to get stamped. I am in India right now and wanted to talk to a Labor lawyer who could tell me the effects of not joining this employer given that there are certain terms and conditions stated in the agreement. Could you suggest me some law firm in US where one can speak to a lawyer on the phone for a reasonable amount of money and seek legal advice.
Thanks
wallpaper Shamed golf legend Tiger Woods
Guest007
06-28 10:50 PM
No worries. As you 140 was approved uscis gave 3year extension. It is not a mistake
anil_gc
09-11 10:46 AM
Can some one answer please?
2011 Tiger Woods scandal keeps
Blog Feeds
06-05 01:20 PM
U.S. Department of Labor (�DOL�) H-1B audits are just another unfortunate by-product of our uncertain economic times. Recent experience shows that DOL will not only request to see an employer�s H-1B �Public Access Files� relating to a specified period of time, but will also request other company records to determine whether an H-1B worker was paid the required wage (i.e, the higher of the applicable prevailing wage or the actual wage paid to similarly employed U.S. workers) at all relevant times. It is critical, therefore, that employers not only insure that their H-1B �Public Access Files� are in order, but...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2009/05/h-1b-audits-are-on-the-rise.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2009/05/h-1b-audits-are-on-the-rise.html)
more...
greatzolin
08-06 11:43 AM
What happends if we don't get our checks cashed and no receipt after aug 17th, but the documents get returned.
Can we refile or are we out of luck? :confused:
Thanks.
PD: Aug, 05
LC Approved: april '06
I-485 Filed: 29rd June 07
At USCI Office July 02, 07
Can we refile or are we out of luck? :confused:
Thanks.
PD: Aug, 05
LC Approved: april '06
I-485 Filed: 29rd June 07
At USCI Office July 02, 07
ciber.couger
07-15 11:54 AM
I sign it twise one for me and one for my wife, but signature numbers didn't change :confused:
more...
sweet23guyin
05-05 01:52 PM
She will have to go out of country and get stamping for H4 if her spouse is maintaining H1.
Automatic validation does not happen..
I need help for my friend. My Friend's spouse on H4 started to work on EAD. She does not work (or if she gets laid off), will she automatically get her H4 status? If not, what does she need to do to get back on H4. Her husband is on H1.
Automatic validation does not happen..
I need help for my friend. My Friend's spouse on H4 started to work on EAD. She does not work (or if she gets laid off), will she automatically get her H4 status? If not, what does she need to do to get back on H4. Her husband is on H1.
2010 Have a Merry Tiger Woods
smisachu
01-12 12:05 PM
I sent you a PM with the contact info of Cyrus Nallaseth.
Does anyone knows good immigration attorney in NYC?
Does anyone knows good immigration attorney in NYC?
more...
peer123
05-04 07:56 PM
bumping it up...
hair Barack Obama amp; Tiger Woods Sex
frostrated
09-01 03:41 PM
Is it having any advantage towards applying I-485 if getting married in US (H1B and other is on F1).
Has no advantage where you get married.
Has no advantage where you get married.
more...
Pagal
03-01 01:36 PM
Hello,
There are lots of articles/news around this issue, but so far these have been exceptions than rule ... I myself entered US through a completely different airport than where I'm employed (on H-1B) and didn't have any issue.
Carry your documents with you and enjoy the travels! :)
There are lots of articles/news around this issue, but so far these have been exceptions than rule ... I myself entered US through a completely different airport than where I'm employed (on H-1B) and didn't have any issue.
Carry your documents with you and enjoy the travels! :)
hot #1 in Tiger Woods Scandal?
Steve Mitchell
February 12th, 2004, 10:38 PM
The Four Thirds system is gaining support. Olympus and Kodak now have company. Get the story here (http://www.dphoto.us/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=185&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0).
more...
house can count Tiger Woods out
Ranjeeth
06-21 01:00 AM
The USCIS announced on June 1, 2006 that the regular H-1 cap for Fiscal Year 2007 (FY2007) was reached on May 26, 2006. Those cases properly filed with the USCIS before the 26th are safe, with respect to the cap, as there are enough cap numbers for these cases. Cases that reached the USCIS on May 26th are in an uncertain situation and will be subject to a random selection process, as there are enough numbers for some, but not all of the May 26th cases. Any regular cap-subject cases received after May 26th will be rejected entirely.This information does NOT impact advanced degree cases, for which cap numbers are still available.
Further details visit: ___deleted___
Further details visit: ___deleted___
tattoo the Tiger Woods scandal,
Pegasus503
02-22 09:25 PM
Any advantage of opening an account on USCIS website to receive automatic case status updates? or I don't need to do that if I keep checking the status online by myself?
They send you and email if something changes, nice if you have a Blackberry/pda
If you have multiple cases i-129, i-131, i-140, i-485 you can see them all on one page, I find that easier to see LUDs in particular the "soft" non-action ones, but it's nice to know the file was touched.
They send you and email if something changes, nice if you have a Blackberry/pda
If you have multiple cases i-129, i-131, i-140, i-485 you can see them all on one page, I find that easier to see LUDs in particular the "soft" non-action ones, but it's nice to know the file was touched.
more...
pictures Tiger Woods Affair: Another
sinemkeceli
02-18 11:43 PM
I am in the process of applying for the green card but as the labor department was delayed to send the paperwork by status became out of status, my lawyer suggested me to go back to my country apply for H1B visa and come back. That is why I want to apply for H1B visa . My lawyer tells me that there is no way I can get an approval if my company doesnt show tax return documents for the last 2 years. Is it true or there is another way or documentation which could be used in order to apply for the visa? My boss doesnt want to show the tax returns but accepts to show a bank account and different type of paperwork such as franchise agreements or certificates.
Can you please let me know if my lawyer suggests me the righ way if not which woudl be the best way to continue my green card process and get a result as soon as possible.
Thank You
Can you please let me know if my lawyer suggests me the righ way if not which woudl be the best way to continue my green card process and get a result as soon as possible.
Thank You
dresses As the Tiger Woods scandal
jthomas
03-13 07:11 PM
I got my first H1B transfer through a lawyer. The lawyer charged $3500/- out of which approx $2500 has to be paid by the employer as per law the lawyers charges would be around 1000 dollars for some paper work.
My second H1B transfer costed be 1200 dollars as lawyers fee and all other charges has to be paid by the employer as per law.
Its best to get an immigration lawyer involved since you can have a peace of mind. There is no need of premium processing. Once you get the receipt you can join the other firm. You don't have to wait till the process gets completed.
My second H1B transfer costed be 1200 dollars as lawyers fee and all other charges has to be paid by the employer as per law.
Its best to get an immigration lawyer involved since you can have a peace of mind. There is no need of premium processing. Once you get the receipt you can join the other firm. You don't have to wait till the process gets completed.
more...
makeup Tiger Woods affair scandal in
Blog Feeds
06-24 01:10 AM
Markos Moulitsas, the prominent left of center blogger, writes in the Hill:Once promising, the GOP�s designs on the Golden State governor�s mansion and Sen. Barbara Boxer�s seat are now running aground on a serious, self-imposed obstacle � the months of anti-immigrant rhetoric voiced by their candidates in this immigrant-rich state. Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman began the campaign as an immigration moderate, but veered to the right in order to win her party's nomination. �Let me be very clear: I am 100 percent against amnesty, no exceptions,� she said. �[U]ntil we actually do secure the border and actually stop illegal...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/kos-immigration-positions-will-cost-california-senate-and-governor-races.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/kos-immigration-positions-will-cost-california-senate-and-governor-races.html)
girlfriend The Tiger Woods scandal just
Roger Binny
02-20 05:39 PM
Cool, if you dont mind please change the thread title.
hairstyles to Tiger Woods Scandal
pkd
09-22 03:51 AM
Hi,
I had an approved I-140 from my previous company with a priority date of Nov 2005. I moved to a new company, and my GC was applied again in Dec 2006. My previous I-140 was used to retain my priority date. However, my new I-140 from this company shows the priority date of Dec 2006.
How do I make sure that my previous priority date (Nov 2005) is on file, and my case will be filed according to that.
Thanks,
Prabhat
I had an approved I-140 from my previous company with a priority date of Nov 2005. I moved to a new company, and my GC was applied again in Dec 2006. My previous I-140 was used to retain my priority date. However, my new I-140 from this company shows the priority date of Dec 2006.
How do I make sure that my previous priority date (Nov 2005) is on file, and my case will be filed according to that.
Thanks,
Prabhat
KOEL
08-08 12:41 AM
Hi,
I had applied for GC through my husband s employer for EB1 category. Recently USCIS websites has updated on its site regarding our case that I485 has been approved but I765 has been denied. Currently we are on L1/L2 visa. Has anyone faced such a situation? And what does this signify?
Can anyone pls shed light on this.
I had applied for GC through my husband s employer for EB1 category. Recently USCIS websites has updated on its site regarding our case that I485 has been approved but I765 has been denied. Currently we are on L1/L2 visa. Has anyone faced such a situation? And what does this signify?
Can anyone pls shed light on this.
Macaca
07-22 05:39 PM
Empty Promises (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_8/editorial/19419-1.html), July 18, 2007
As Senate Democrats were preparing to go to the mattresses over Iraq voting procedures and as Republicans threatened to stop all activity over a judicial appointment, it's worth recalling what Senate leaders were promising at the outset of the 110th Congress.
On Jan. 4, incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) declared on the floor that "last November, the voters sent us a message - Democrats and Republicans. The voters are upset with Congress and the partisan gridlock. The voters want a government that focuses on their needs. The voters want change. Together, we must deliver that change."
Minutes later, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) observed that "the challenges ahead will not be met if we do nothing to overcome the partisanship that has come to characterize this body over the past several years. A culture of partisanship over principle represents a grave threat to the Senate's best tradition as a place of constructive cooperation. It undermines the spirit and the purpose of this institution. And we must do something to reverse its course."
Six months on, the Senate has devolved into a nonstop brawl. The House, where leaders made let's-work-together promises of their own, also is a cauldron of partisanship, but at least there the rules permit a majority to rule.
But together, they've been able to pass just three pieces of significant legislation - a hike in the minimum wage, expansion of stem-cell research funding and a supplemental appropriation to fund the Iraq War. Only the first was directly signed into law. The second was vetoed by President Bush. The third was vetoed then passed.
Partisan warfare and inaction on issues from health care to immigration to energy - even lobbying and ethics reform, once the top priority for this Congress - has reduced respect for the legislative branch to its lowest level ever. Respect for the presidency is not much higher.
Who's to blame? Senate Democrats accuse Senate Republicans of "obstructionism" - systematic refusal to grant unanimous consent so that bills can be voted upon. Senate Republicans blame Reid for invoking cloture to stifle full debate and the offering of amendments.
The level of rancor is escalating now because Democrats are frustrated that Republicans are insisting on a 60-vote threshold on Iraq War amendments - as though Democrats in the past have not used the 60-vote requirement when it suited them. Republicans are threatening to create procedural chaos and allow little or no action on the floor if Democrats block a single appellate court nominee.
In January, Senators of both parties gathered in the Old Senate Chamber in what McConnell described as "a small act of bipartisanship" that he hoped would lead to a restoration of the Senate's reputation. Now, perhaps, Senators should regather there and contemplate their current level of public esteem.
As Senate Democrats were preparing to go to the mattresses over Iraq voting procedures and as Republicans threatened to stop all activity over a judicial appointment, it's worth recalling what Senate leaders were promising at the outset of the 110th Congress.
On Jan. 4, incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) declared on the floor that "last November, the voters sent us a message - Democrats and Republicans. The voters are upset with Congress and the partisan gridlock. The voters want a government that focuses on their needs. The voters want change. Together, we must deliver that change."
Minutes later, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) observed that "the challenges ahead will not be met if we do nothing to overcome the partisanship that has come to characterize this body over the past several years. A culture of partisanship over principle represents a grave threat to the Senate's best tradition as a place of constructive cooperation. It undermines the spirit and the purpose of this institution. And we must do something to reverse its course."
Six months on, the Senate has devolved into a nonstop brawl. The House, where leaders made let's-work-together promises of their own, also is a cauldron of partisanship, but at least there the rules permit a majority to rule.
But together, they've been able to pass just three pieces of significant legislation - a hike in the minimum wage, expansion of stem-cell research funding and a supplemental appropriation to fund the Iraq War. Only the first was directly signed into law. The second was vetoed by President Bush. The third was vetoed then passed.
Partisan warfare and inaction on issues from health care to immigration to energy - even lobbying and ethics reform, once the top priority for this Congress - has reduced respect for the legislative branch to its lowest level ever. Respect for the presidency is not much higher.
Who's to blame? Senate Democrats accuse Senate Republicans of "obstructionism" - systematic refusal to grant unanimous consent so that bills can be voted upon. Senate Republicans blame Reid for invoking cloture to stifle full debate and the offering of amendments.
The level of rancor is escalating now because Democrats are frustrated that Republicans are insisting on a 60-vote threshold on Iraq War amendments - as though Democrats in the past have not used the 60-vote requirement when it suited them. Republicans are threatening to create procedural chaos and allow little or no action on the floor if Democrats block a single appellate court nominee.
In January, Senators of both parties gathered in the Old Senate Chamber in what McConnell described as "a small act of bipartisanship" that he hoped would lead to a restoration of the Senate's reputation. Now, perhaps, Senators should regather there and contemplate their current level of public esteem.
No comments:
Post a Comment