PD_Dec2002
05-22 08:21 AM
Please correct me if I am wrong, but the Hammond Law Group (HLG) was hired by IV for its lobbying efforts, correct? What does HLG have to say about the fact that none of the provisions for legal immigrants went into the CIR? What's their take on the chances that favorable amendments for legal immigrants will make it?
Would be interesting to get their point of view...
Thanks,
Jayant
Would be interesting to get their point of view...
Thanks,
Jayant
wallpaper Gemini Sign Tattoos | Pictures
mmk123
07-29 01:18 PM
Thanks! It's just a modest attempt to entertain outselves with humor in these hard times.
Actually thanks to these articles and comments on BW and other forums - they are inspiration to write something witty and funny!
- M
Actually thanks to these articles and comments on BW and other forums - they are inspiration to write something witty and funny!
- M
pdakwala
04-29 11:23 AM
Guys,
All your efforts are very very important. IV appreciate your efforts. Please keep up the good work.
To those who have become a member of IV and have not contributed, please contribute. You have already taken your first step to solve your problem by becoming IV member. One would become a member only if they believe in what IV is doing. Contributing $100 is not a big amount. So please move forward and contribute.
Once again thanks to everyone who have contributed more than once, and to those who are sending emails to their friends requesting them to make some contribution.
All your efforts are very very important. IV appreciate your efforts. Please keep up the good work.
To those who have become a member of IV and have not contributed, please contribute. You have already taken your first step to solve your problem by becoming IV member. One would become a member only if they believe in what IV is doing. Contributing $100 is not a big amount. So please move forward and contribute.
Once again thanks to everyone who have contributed more than once, and to those who are sending emails to their friends requesting them to make some contribution.
2011 Tagged gemini, symbol, tattoos
webm
02-27 02:40 PM
1) EB3 people believe and argue that it doesn't matter.
2) From what I have noticed on , eb1 > eb2 > eb3.
3) But it's not like USCIS will process all eb1 cases, then eb2 cases, and finally eb3 cases.
4) In the end, USCIS is a black box system and no one knows exactly how they work.
5) If your PD is current, be happy and your GC should come soon enough. Why bother about the details?
6) The simple logic is, eb1 has higher qualifications than eb2, and eb2 has more qualifications compared to eb3. If you believe they treat everyone the same, then be happy and stick with your belief.
Well said..I agree with you!!
2) From what I have noticed on , eb1 > eb2 > eb3.
3) But it's not like USCIS will process all eb1 cases, then eb2 cases, and finally eb3 cases.
4) In the end, USCIS is a black box system and no one knows exactly how they work.
5) If your PD is current, be happy and your GC should come soon enough. Why bother about the details?
6) The simple logic is, eb1 has higher qualifications than eb2, and eb2 has more qualifications compared to eb3. If you believe they treat everyone the same, then be happy and stick with your belief.
Well said..I agree with you!!
more...
lecter
March 2nd, 2004, 07:59 PM
I've noticed a massive upswing in comments and photo discussions..
makes me warm and fuzzy all over....
keep 'em coming.....
(I have done four weeks quota to stay ahead of the game)
lol
;)
:P
Rob
makes me warm and fuzzy all over....
keep 'em coming.....
(I have done four weeks quota to stay ahead of the game)
lol
;)
:P
Rob
rameshvaid
03-19 06:13 PM
I went to US Consulate Montreal Canada yesterday and they held back my passport, Copy of LC, Originals of my I 485 and H1/H4. They told me your company is too small 7-8 employees and need to search the company. I had my H1/H4's got stamped in Toronto in 2005 without any problem.
My I 140 is approved in June 06, Submitted I 485 in June/July 07 got EAD Cards in Oct.-07. I also got my 3 years H1/H4 approvals on Jan-18th, 08.
Any idea how much time they are going to check the status of the company? Does the size of the company really matters? I am paid regularily and my company is a real estate investment firm, due to recent recession the profit of the company is low as compared to previous years. Will this make any difference. I am EB 3 with priority date July 30th, 2003.
Any advise?? Has some one been in the same situation. My older son is in college and has exams on Monday? Any thoughts/suggestions.
RV
My I 140 is approved in June 06, Submitted I 485 in June/July 07 got EAD Cards in Oct.-07. I also got my 3 years H1/H4 approvals on Jan-18th, 08.
Any idea how much time they are going to check the status of the company? Does the size of the company really matters? I am paid regularily and my company is a real estate investment firm, due to recent recession the profit of the company is low as compared to previous years. Will this make any difference. I am EB 3 with priority date July 30th, 2003.
Any advise?? Has some one been in the same situation. My older son is in college and has exams on Monday? Any thoughts/suggestions.
RV
more...
nogc_noproblem
04-09 04:41 PM
Whether the IO at Port of Entry asked anything about your H1B Visa Stamp?
My H1B visa stamping application finally got approved after 2 months at the Mumbai consulate. But I travelled back on the AP a month back as my employer started getting impatient.
I have received an email from them asking to submit the passport for stamping as the administrative processing on the application is completed.
I am planning to write back to them that I no longer need a visa stamp for travel as I travelled back on the AP. Would this be a bad idea ?
Has anyone withdrawn their H1B visa stamping application before ?
Appreciate any information on this.
My H1B visa stamping application finally got approved after 2 months at the Mumbai consulate. But I travelled back on the AP a month back as my employer started getting impatient.
I have received an email from them asking to submit the passport for stamping as the administrative processing on the application is completed.
I am planning to write back to them that I no longer need a visa stamp for travel as I travelled back on the AP. Would this be a bad idea ?
Has anyone withdrawn their H1B visa stamping application before ?
Appreciate any information on this.
2010 Gemini Twins Symbol and Gemini
H1B-GC
04-07 10:50 AM
Just got it. Right now.Thanks guys.
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Approval notice sent.
On April 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service.
If you have questions or concerns about your application or the case status results listed above, or if you have not received a decision from USCIS within the current processing time listed*, please contact USCIS Customer Service at (800) 375-5283.
Congrats Fella!! Now time to stay at the Mail Box in the afternoon to check out the mail.Go 'Green' and pls. keep coming to the forum as and when time permits.
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Approval notice sent.
On April 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service.
If you have questions or concerns about your application or the case status results listed above, or if you have not received a decision from USCIS within the current processing time listed*, please contact USCIS Customer Service at (800) 375-5283.
Congrats Fella!! Now time to stay at the Mail Box in the afternoon to check out the mail.Go 'Green' and pls. keep coming to the forum as and when time permits.
more...
continuedProgress
04-28 11:23 PM
Renewed my AP in fall of last year - applied online. Didnt need to FP.
hair ZODIAC SIGNS TATTOOS
sunny1000
11-26 06:01 PM
Today when I looked the I-485 status I found the status changed to card production ordered. I'm traveling to India on 1st Dec (coming saturday). It is a business trip and I'm unable to postpone it. My attorney says If I travel now, they will consider the GC abandoned. Is this true?? I have an approve AP with me. I also planned to stamp my H1B visa in India. What a confusion!
Gurus please give your thoughts.
Anil
What if you are a non-immigrant who does not know about the "case status online" and you travel outside the U.S without knowing that your case has been approved. This is where your AP comes into picture as you informed about your impending travel needs to USCIS and they approved it by issuing the Parole doc. So, I am not sure about your case getting abandoned.
But, if your lawyer says that your application will be considered as abandoned, I would listen to his/her advice rather than any of us on this forum since none of us are qualified attorneys. The only exception would be a person who has travelled outside while the GC got approved and has been thru this situation before.
You may also want to post your query at www.immigrationportal.com
In any case, if you can postpone the travel or get an I-551 stamp like someone else mentioned, please do that.
Disclaimer: this is not legal advice.
Gurus please give your thoughts.
Anil
What if you are a non-immigrant who does not know about the "case status online" and you travel outside the U.S without knowing that your case has been approved. This is where your AP comes into picture as you informed about your impending travel needs to USCIS and they approved it by issuing the Parole doc. So, I am not sure about your case getting abandoned.
But, if your lawyer says that your application will be considered as abandoned, I would listen to his/her advice rather than any of us on this forum since none of us are qualified attorneys. The only exception would be a person who has travelled outside while the GC got approved and has been thru this situation before.
You may also want to post your query at www.immigrationportal.com
In any case, if you can postpone the travel or get an I-551 stamp like someone else mentioned, please do that.
Disclaimer: this is not legal advice.
more...
pappu
06-27 07:36 PM
From: National Immigration Forum
Web: http://www.immigrationforum.org
Recess
Congress is out for its 4th of July recess. It has been a while since the last update went out, but not much has been happening—certainly not compared to one year ago, as a major immigration reform bill was being killed by filibuster in the Senate.
On the one hand, the Forum, and thousands of issue advocacy organizations in politically-gridlocked Washington, are waiting for a new Congress and a new President. On the other hand, there is never a time when we are not defending against the bad ideas that immigration restrictionists and their friends in Congress are trying to slip through Congress.
There is little chance of having positive legislation enacted this year. There are, however, some proposals being considered. In the House, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, with co-sponsors from both parties has put a couple of bills into the hopper that would offer modest relief for immigrants waiting for visas. H.R. 5882 would “re-capture” immigrant visas that went unused during the years 1992 to 2007, and would make changes in the law to prevent visas from going unused in the future. This would effectively make available an additional 225,000 visas on a one-time basis, with about 93,000 of those visas going to the family preferences.
H.R. 5921 would eliminate the per-country ceiling for employment-based immigrant visas, and raise the per-country limit for family-based visas.
In the Senate, we will at some point see further action on AgJOBS, and proposals related to seasonal non-agricultural workers and high-skilled temporary workers.
Even for these modest reforms, prospects for passage are uncertain.
Oversight and Accountability
If there is any good news coming out of Washington, it is that Congress, after giving boatloads of money to the immigration enforcement agencies, is starting to ask for some accountability.
There have been some hearings, including a hearing in the House on June 4th on the subject of deaths in immigration detention, where some of the egregious misconducts of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) has been questioned. There have also been hearings to examine immigration enforcement proposals still being considered. Several committees (including the Immigration Subcommittee) have considered mandatory electronic employment verification plans. The Shuler/Tancredo “SAVE” Act, the proposal that has the most momentum (if you can call it that at this point) now has 190 signatures on a discharge petition that, if it gains 217 signatures, will force a vote on the House floor. Since April 1, it has gained just five signatures. We expect there will be more hearings where Congress will exercise its oversight responsibilities over the Department of Homeland Security, and in part these hearings will continue to point to the need to fix our broken immigration system.
The Appropriations Season
We are getting in to the appropriations season and, legislatively, the action will turn to the 12 spending bills that Congress must pass by September 30 to keep the various government agencies running. (Given the current gridlock, no one actually expects Congress to complete its work on the spending bills; more likely temporary spending bills will be passed to tide the government over until a new Congress is in place.)
Spending bills offer the greatest chance for mischief. Immigration restrictionists will no doubt offer amendment after amendment to make life more miserable for immigrants. In this election season, the main function of these proposals will not necessarily be to pass them into law, but to gain material for 30-second campaign advertisements in which anti-immigrant members of Congress will attack their opponents as being soft on immigration, national security, etc.
There is, unfortunately, always the chance that one of these proposals actually passes, and this will require the vigilance of immigration advocates in Washington in the coming weeks.
There is also the chance that some good proposals may find their way into the spending bills. In the House, the bill controlling spending for the Department of Homeland Security has passed with a number of reporting requirements for ICE—in keeping with the new interest by Congress in holding the enforcement agencies accountable.
The target date for adjournment for the summer is August 8. After that date, the House and Senate will be safely out of Washington until September, after the party conventions.
Immigrants and the 2008 Elections
The real action is taking place outside the beltway. In preparation for the upcoming elections, there will be much focus on getting immigrants registered to vote and turned out to vote. This weekend, on June 28, there will be a kickoff in Chicago of the New Americans Vote 2008 campaign, which is a collaborative effort of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Center for Community Change, Fair Immigration Reform Movement, National Council of La Raza, NDN, America’s Voice, United Food and Commercial Workers and the We Are America Alliance. The campaign combines training, organizing and electoral civic engagement targeting immigrant communities in 17 states. Speaking at the kickoff will be Senator Dick Durbin and Representatives Luis Gutierrez and Jan Schakowsky. For more, see:
http://icirr.org/node/2882
Immigrants are eager to weigh in on the immigration debate, and it is expected they will be doing this in unprecedented numbers in polling places across the country this fall. Building up to the elections, organizations including the Forum will be tracking the story of how the immigration issue is being used by politicians. It is expected that we will see a repeat of 2006—Republican candidates will use the immigration issue to play on the fears of their constituents in the hope of gaining votes, the debate will be ugly, and Democrats may or may not take a more moderate view.
Web: http://www.immigrationforum.org
Recess
Congress is out for its 4th of July recess. It has been a while since the last update went out, but not much has been happening—certainly not compared to one year ago, as a major immigration reform bill was being killed by filibuster in the Senate.
On the one hand, the Forum, and thousands of issue advocacy organizations in politically-gridlocked Washington, are waiting for a new Congress and a new President. On the other hand, there is never a time when we are not defending against the bad ideas that immigration restrictionists and their friends in Congress are trying to slip through Congress.
There is little chance of having positive legislation enacted this year. There are, however, some proposals being considered. In the House, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, with co-sponsors from both parties has put a couple of bills into the hopper that would offer modest relief for immigrants waiting for visas. H.R. 5882 would “re-capture” immigrant visas that went unused during the years 1992 to 2007, and would make changes in the law to prevent visas from going unused in the future. This would effectively make available an additional 225,000 visas on a one-time basis, with about 93,000 of those visas going to the family preferences.
H.R. 5921 would eliminate the per-country ceiling for employment-based immigrant visas, and raise the per-country limit for family-based visas.
In the Senate, we will at some point see further action on AgJOBS, and proposals related to seasonal non-agricultural workers and high-skilled temporary workers.
Even for these modest reforms, prospects for passage are uncertain.
Oversight and Accountability
If there is any good news coming out of Washington, it is that Congress, after giving boatloads of money to the immigration enforcement agencies, is starting to ask for some accountability.
There have been some hearings, including a hearing in the House on June 4th on the subject of deaths in immigration detention, where some of the egregious misconducts of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) has been questioned. There have also been hearings to examine immigration enforcement proposals still being considered. Several committees (including the Immigration Subcommittee) have considered mandatory electronic employment verification plans. The Shuler/Tancredo “SAVE” Act, the proposal that has the most momentum (if you can call it that at this point) now has 190 signatures on a discharge petition that, if it gains 217 signatures, will force a vote on the House floor. Since April 1, it has gained just five signatures. We expect there will be more hearings where Congress will exercise its oversight responsibilities over the Department of Homeland Security, and in part these hearings will continue to point to the need to fix our broken immigration system.
The Appropriations Season
We are getting in to the appropriations season and, legislatively, the action will turn to the 12 spending bills that Congress must pass by September 30 to keep the various government agencies running. (Given the current gridlock, no one actually expects Congress to complete its work on the spending bills; more likely temporary spending bills will be passed to tide the government over until a new Congress is in place.)
Spending bills offer the greatest chance for mischief. Immigration restrictionists will no doubt offer amendment after amendment to make life more miserable for immigrants. In this election season, the main function of these proposals will not necessarily be to pass them into law, but to gain material for 30-second campaign advertisements in which anti-immigrant members of Congress will attack their opponents as being soft on immigration, national security, etc.
There is, unfortunately, always the chance that one of these proposals actually passes, and this will require the vigilance of immigration advocates in Washington in the coming weeks.
There is also the chance that some good proposals may find their way into the spending bills. In the House, the bill controlling spending for the Department of Homeland Security has passed with a number of reporting requirements for ICE—in keeping with the new interest by Congress in holding the enforcement agencies accountable.
The target date for adjournment for the summer is August 8. After that date, the House and Senate will be safely out of Washington until September, after the party conventions.
Immigrants and the 2008 Elections
The real action is taking place outside the beltway. In preparation for the upcoming elections, there will be much focus on getting immigrants registered to vote and turned out to vote. This weekend, on June 28, there will be a kickoff in Chicago of the New Americans Vote 2008 campaign, which is a collaborative effort of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Center for Community Change, Fair Immigration Reform Movement, National Council of La Raza, NDN, America’s Voice, United Food and Commercial Workers and the We Are America Alliance. The campaign combines training, organizing and electoral civic engagement targeting immigrant communities in 17 states. Speaking at the kickoff will be Senator Dick Durbin and Representatives Luis Gutierrez and Jan Schakowsky. For more, see:
http://icirr.org/node/2882
Immigrants are eager to weigh in on the immigration debate, and it is expected they will be doing this in unprecedented numbers in polling places across the country this fall. Building up to the elections, organizations including the Forum will be tracking the story of how the immigration issue is being used by politicians. It is expected that we will see a repeat of 2006—Republican candidates will use the immigration issue to play on the fears of their constituents in the hope of gaining votes, the debate will be ugly, and Democrats may or may not take a more moderate view.
hot Gemini Symbol Tattoos
sabbygirl99
07-07 08:57 AM
I have described my situation below. Can someone please tell me if they have ever encountered this and what is the best avenue to take?
1. My LC was sent back to me on Tues (after 4 years).
2. It was neither denied nor approved. They said that I did not make at least 95% of prevailing wage rate.
3. I am currently a little less than that if I can take into account all bonuses etc.
4. The company's immigration lawyer (outside counsel) is saying that if I think that I will probably meet the wage rate threshhold by the time entire GC process is complete, then it's OK to amend LC and say that, "Yes, I am making that much money".
5. Else - other option is to challenge the DOLs definition of prevailing wage rate.
6. Company lawyer/HR (I don't think any of them have any immigration law background) are all confused about it. They are not sure whether I can take bonuses into account. If I don't - then it is less likely that I wil reach prevailing wage rate at next review.
7. Also - they are uncomfortable saying that I WILL meet PW. I guess they think that I will hold them to it and then just slack off until my review.
What should I do???
1. My LC was sent back to me on Tues (after 4 years).
2. It was neither denied nor approved. They said that I did not make at least 95% of prevailing wage rate.
3. I am currently a little less than that if I can take into account all bonuses etc.
4. The company's immigration lawyer (outside counsel) is saying that if I think that I will probably meet the wage rate threshhold by the time entire GC process is complete, then it's OK to amend LC and say that, "Yes, I am making that much money".
5. Else - other option is to challenge the DOLs definition of prevailing wage rate.
6. Company lawyer/HR (I don't think any of them have any immigration law background) are all confused about it. They are not sure whether I can take bonuses into account. If I don't - then it is less likely that I wil reach prevailing wage rate at next review.
7. Also - they are uncomfortable saying that I WILL meet PW. I guess they think that I will hold them to it and then just slack off until my review.
What should I do???
more...
house the signs of the chinese
shyamiv
09-20 03:23 PM
Guys..i have noticed that so many other members has already been complained about the getting Red dots for no reason...i got the red for this post for just a spell mistake. This is too much and IV has to do some thing about this. Otherwise people will afraid or not be willing to post their opinions here...
That should not stop you from expressing your opinions and thoughts here in this forum !
That should not stop you from expressing your opinions and thoughts here in this forum !
tattoo Hence the Gemini zodiac signs
Anil_s
07-02 06:48 AM
Hi Ari,
Thank you for the information.
How Will it affect my H1-B process
Anil
Thank you for the information.
How Will it affect my H1-B process
Anil
more...
pictures zodiac signs cancer tattoo.
abdulazeez77
08-14 06:06 AM
On reading my last post again, I don't think it is very clear. Let me try to explain again. When my wife comes back into the country, she needs to get a new I-94 at the port of entry. One of my friends mentioned that there is a possibility that the officer could mistakenly stamp the date on the new I-94 card as the same as on my wife's visa stamping (Dec 2007 as per my prior employer). In order to avoid this, should my wife pre-emptively submit her passport as well as transferred I-797 and I-539 and request the officer to stamp the new dates on the I-94 (Dec 2009)? Please advise.
Regards,
Azeez
Regards,
Azeez
dresses 2011 Gemini Symbol Tattoos
glus
05-10 07:23 PM
hello,
Nothing is "forever." If you hire a good attorney, he/she can argue, that you did have immigrant intent in the past, but have abandoned it and will try to get you a visa. However, without a good lawyer, it may be very difficult to persuade a consular officer that you no longer wish to immigrate to the U.S. after entering here. Contact me via PM if you wish and I can get you in touch with attorney who can answer more questions of yours. Thanx.
Nothing is "forever." If you hire a good attorney, he/she can argue, that you did have immigrant intent in the past, but have abandoned it and will try to get you a visa. However, without a good lawyer, it may be very difficult to persuade a consular officer that you no longer wish to immigrate to the U.S. after entering here. Contact me via PM if you wish and I can get you in touch with attorney who can answer more questions of yours. Thanx.
more...
makeup Tattoo Designs of Zodiac Signs
akred
04-16 11:51 PM
Advanced degree = MS and higher
Generally STEM - Science, Technology, Engineering and Math all fall under Science/Engineering colleges. Anthing out of this college including MBA, MA, Accountancy, Marketing etc are not included in STEM.
Are you getting this from official sources? I think Accountancy, Marketing and so on would qualify as long as the degree is a Master of Science.
Generally STEM - Science, Technology, Engineering and Math all fall under Science/Engineering colleges. Anthing out of this college including MBA, MA, Accountancy, Marketing etc are not included in STEM.
Are you getting this from official sources? I think Accountancy, Marketing and so on would qualify as long as the degree is a Master of Science.
girlfriend sign tattoos,white gemini
gc0402
07-17 09:00 AM
Forgot/didn't know about A# mentioned on my I-140 approval and did not mention it on I-485 application/EAD/AP. will it be an issue??
If it is mentioned in I-140 approval, do we supposed to write in I-485 and other applications? As I understand, A# is registration # and which is assigned when I-485 is accepted? Please somebody confirm it.
If it is mentioned in I-140 approval, do we supposed to write in I-485 and other applications? As I understand, A# is registration # and which is assigned when I-485 is accepted? Please somebody confirm it.
hairstyles Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer,
sonu9
07-30 12:45 PM
hi thank you . yes we can, receiving letters from "x" address is not at all problem then is it fine to put X adress ? no problem right ? thank you once again.
glus
11-26 05:39 PM
Thanks for the replies, I did not get my approval notice so far and the travel is around the corner.
Take infopass and get I-551 stamp in your passport. Print out your online status and when you speak to an IO explain the situation. It is risky to leave the states at this point.
Take infopass and get I-551 stamp in your passport. Print out your online status and when you speak to an IO explain the situation. It is risky to leave the states at this point.
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.