yagw
12-08 02:14 AM
On the infopass web site, there are four categories, and I can't relate to any of them. I don't have an SR because the rep refused to open one; I don't have a notice. Is it still possible to go for infopass?
We offer 4 kinds of appointments for a case that you have already filed. Please choose from the following -
Order from Immigration Court - If you were directed to us for processing based on an order from the Immigration Judge. You must bring all documents required in the post order instructions given to you by the court.
Case Processing Appointment - If you received a notice to go to your local office for further case processing.
EAD inquiry appointment - If your I-765 employment authorization application has been pending for more than 90 days.
Case Services follow-up appointment - If it has been over 45 days since you contacted NCSC and have not received a response to your inquiry. You must bring the Service Request ID Number related to your inquiry to the appointment.
You made a different selection at the first step.
Under
Please select Kind of Service you need
You need Service on a case that has already been filed
You are a new Permanent Resident and have not yet received your Permanent Resident Card
You want to file an application in person
You need information or other services
You need a form.
You are a United States Military Member, Military Retiree or a Military Dependant
I guess you chose option 1. Here if you choose "You need information or other services" you can schedule one. Try your luck with infopass - it depends on the IO you talk to. Tell them that the customer service rep told you to go to infopass to get the PP stamped.
We offer 4 kinds of appointments for a case that you have already filed. Please choose from the following -
Order from Immigration Court - If you were directed to us for processing based on an order from the Immigration Judge. You must bring all documents required in the post order instructions given to you by the court.
Case Processing Appointment - If you received a notice to go to your local office for further case processing.
EAD inquiry appointment - If your I-765 employment authorization application has been pending for more than 90 days.
Case Services follow-up appointment - If it has been over 45 days since you contacted NCSC and have not received a response to your inquiry. You must bring the Service Request ID Number related to your inquiry to the appointment.
You made a different selection at the first step.
Under
Please select Kind of Service you need
You need Service on a case that has already been filed
You are a new Permanent Resident and have not yet received your Permanent Resident Card
You want to file an application in person
You need information or other services
You need a form.
You are a United States Military Member, Military Retiree or a Military Dependant
I guess you chose option 1. Here if you choose "You need information or other services" you can schedule one. Try your luck with infopass - it depends on the IO you talk to. Tell them that the customer service rep told you to go to infopass to get the PP stamped.
wallpaper Underwhelmed by the new BMW M1
mn2007
08-27 04:01 PM
I am a July 2nd filer with a priority date of July29,2004 (EB2-I). I did not receive biometric appointment so far. I had a infopass appointment today, and the immigration officer checked the system and generated the FP appointment and I went straight to ASC after Infopass and got my FP done. Officer also confirmed that my name check is cleared last month but had no idea why my file is not assigned to an Immigration officer. She said there are no apparent issues that she can see in the system with my application and she opened a SR for them to look in to my file.
MN
MN
seebi
03-14 09:19 AM
Thanks desi3933 for the USCIS links.
2011 With the new model, BMW
DSLStart
07-15 10:03 AM
thats weird!
watchout buddy, some chick working at USCIS might be attracted to you and wants to get your new pics for every application you make.... :D
When my AP came up for renewal my attorney asked to get new set of photos.
In addition my cousin's EAD application got RFE'ed to get new set of photos even though the photos were recent. The reason given was that they had used same photos to renew their visa few months back (less than 6 months).
Is USCIS coming up some new rule about photos being 'unused' ?? The guidelines say that photos should be recent (taken in last 6 months). However nowhere I do I see that the photos should be 'unused' previously ?
Anyone else had same experience ?
watchout buddy, some chick working at USCIS might be attracted to you and wants to get your new pics for every application you make.... :D
When my AP came up for renewal my attorney asked to get new set of photos.
In addition my cousin's EAD application got RFE'ed to get new set of photos even though the photos were recent. The reason given was that they had used same photos to renew their visa few months back (less than 6 months).
Is USCIS coming up some new rule about photos being 'unused' ?? The guidelines say that photos should be recent (taken in last 6 months). However nowhere I do I see that the photos should be 'unused' previously ?
Anyone else had same experience ?
more...
sprash
06-01 06:26 PM
I had an RFE last year and they asked me to submit photos. They claimed I had not sent photos, which is untrue. I had sent them, but they probably lost them.
CheckRaise
10-09 06:38 PM
you can search for cases filed using start and end date - its nothing fancy or interesting as you might have imagined - if your employer is indeed saying that its hard to pull old cases - its total BS -- either they dont want you to worry or they dont want to divulge your case number
I have requested again for the screenshot mentioning the same and waiting on a response. You do seem to have an idea how it looks like, if you dont mind, would you be able to post a screenshot with all information greyed out. With that handy, if they come back with, 'no way' I can go back at them hard saying they are BS'ing me and call their bluff.
Thanks again!
I have requested again for the screenshot mentioning the same and waiting on a response. You do seem to have an idea how it looks like, if you dont mind, would you be able to post a screenshot with all information greyed out. With that handy, if they come back with, 'no way' I can go back at them hard saying they are BS'ing me and call their bluff.
Thanks again!
more...
girishvar
08-15 12:09 PM
You have to use I-824 if you change the consulate, if it is a consular case. If your I-94 is extended within america, there is no need. However because of PIMS, it is better to initiate a I-824 and get confirmation before proceeding for stamping. It is better to check your lawyer to get the right legal advise.
2010 Bmw M1 Coupe 2011. All new BMW
dixie
10-17 03:13 AM
It means you will be able to get your EAD in a few weeks, based on your ability to file for I-485. The real thing ... well it can take anywhere between 8-9 months to more than 3 years, depending on how quickly FBI completes your name check and how slow or fast the USCIS service center is.
Does a current PD mean you're getting your GC in a few weeks or does it mean "we've started working on it, we'll let you know":)
Thanks!
Does a current PD mean you're getting your GC in a few weeks or does it mean "we've started working on it, we'll let you know":)
Thanks!
more...
cucubau
10-17 01:51 PM
A co-worker and I applied together at exactly the same time.
We got approvals for LC and I-140 within weeks of each other.
Now, our PD became current in September 2006, he got approved a few days ago and...I found out I am stuck in the name check shit!
FYI, his name is extremely common and mine is extremely rare (in my entire life, I have never met someone with the same name!), so go figure...:confused: :confused: :confused:
This shouldn't be a problem if you are a law obeying citizen :D How do you find out the status of the FBI name clearance? You wait until PD becomes current and nothing happens then place an inquiry with BCIS?
Thanks!
We got approvals for LC and I-140 within weeks of each other.
Now, our PD became current in September 2006, he got approved a few days ago and...I found out I am stuck in the name check shit!
FYI, his name is extremely common and mine is extremely rare (in my entire life, I have never met someone with the same name!), so go figure...:confused: :confused: :confused:
This shouldn't be a problem if you are a law obeying citizen :D How do you find out the status of the FBI name clearance? You wait until PD becomes current and nothing happens then place an inquiry with BCIS?
Thanks!
hair New details about the 2011 BMW
AuntyDan
06-21 08:32 PM
You have mail logiclife, let me know if I can be of use to you.
more...
prout02
07-30 12:26 PM
I have read in this forum frequent questions about this - legality/enforceability of noncompete clause. Here's a recent court decision from Kansas. It talks about physician practices. No idea if it is applicable to other professions. But the four factors cited in the decision seem relevant.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
hot All new BMW M1 Coupe 2011 and
GreenCard4US
08-21 02:40 PM
Sorry about the dates, I have corrected them.
more...
house 2011 Bmw M1 Series. the new
aps1
08-24 09:27 AM
Hi,
I was wondering under what option you are able to get info pass at Hartford. Is there is any specific time in a day you tried?
"You need information or other services"
I used this option. I tried in the afternoon around 1.00PM
Hope this helps!
I was wondering under what option you are able to get info pass at Hartford. Is there is any specific time in a day you tried?
"You need information or other services"
I used this option. I tried in the afternoon around 1.00PM
Hope this helps!
tattoo New BMW M1 Hommage With Shiny
gparr
January 21st, 2004, 08:58 AM
Matt, There were patchy clouds so the shutter speeds were all over the place but never slower than 1/300, which is why the lens was wide open. I was scraping for every ounce of light I could get and I knew the extremes of sunlight on one side of the geese and shadows on the other were going to cause me problems, regardless. I did think about swimming out there and hanging a sheet on the left to reflect, but it was zero degrees and I just wasn't up to it. ;)
I was going to reshoot this morning, with smaller apertures and a higher ISO to retain shutter speeds but, as things go in Illinois in the winter, yesterday was probably the only sunny day we'll get this week, so no warm morning sun to shine on the geese. It's a popular hangout spot for geese, so I'll try the shot again. I'm not all that excited about the shot itself, but it's an excercise in perfecting the miniscule talent I have.
Don't worry, I have enough sense to not touch a 1D unless my pockets are bulging with disposable income because I know that, once I do, I won't sleep until I have one!
Don,
Thanks for the thoughts. I tend to go right to manual. I'll incorporate Av and Tv modes into my shooting to see if I like them and/or can get comfortable with them. Usually, once I go to that side of the dial, I figure I might as well do all of the work. Agreed on the fully automatic side. I've used it a few times to see what it would do, but I just can't get comfortable with allowing a computer to dictate how my image will look, outside of composition. And I doubt I'll ever rely on the automated side of the dial.
Gary
I was going to reshoot this morning, with smaller apertures and a higher ISO to retain shutter speeds but, as things go in Illinois in the winter, yesterday was probably the only sunny day we'll get this week, so no warm morning sun to shine on the geese. It's a popular hangout spot for geese, so I'll try the shot again. I'm not all that excited about the shot itself, but it's an excercise in perfecting the miniscule talent I have.
Don't worry, I have enough sense to not touch a 1D unless my pockets are bulging with disposable income because I know that, once I do, I won't sleep until I have one!
Don,
Thanks for the thoughts. I tend to go right to manual. I'll incorporate Av and Tv modes into my shooting to see if I like them and/or can get comfortable with them. Usually, once I go to that side of the dial, I figure I might as well do all of the work. Agreed on the fully automatic side. I've used it a few times to see what it would do, but I just can't get comfortable with allowing a computer to dictate how my image will look, outside of composition. And I doubt I'll ever rely on the automated side of the dial.
Gary