jonty_11
09-19 11:28 AM
Illegals do that all thetime to get sanctuary
wallpaper Mazda MX5 Typ NB Rear Bumper
bsbawa10
05-26 09:39 PM
Dude, what are you talking about :confused::confused::confused: Am I missing any comedy here?
Just comparing USCIS with any product selling company .
Just comparing USCIS with any product selling company .
gautamagg
07-20 02:27 AM
As some of you know that I don't really post on IV after the belittling of my posts and stand regarding F1 visas and support to Mr , I was asked by another IV loyalist friend who felt it was relevant I shared a letter I had sent to Mr. E Gonzalez over email yesterday as learnt of this issue yesterday.
Dear Mr. Gonzalez
I wanted to thank you for the announcement that has brought relief for many of us it is still the beginning of our fight for better processes and improved and updated laws for employment based green cards. I still don't see the light at the end of the tunnel with so many pending applications. I have already been 3 years in the process and my lawyers think I would be out for another 2 if not 3 after having gained premier advanced education from the US. The reasons are many fold. Some are process delays related and some due to statutory guidelines per the legislations. I wanted to document a few issues that if resolved can bring in a lot a relief. Also, I need to introduce you to an issue I was made aware of by a close friend who was surprisingly unhappy with yesterday's announcement.
Process delays on the part of USCIS have caused many delays in employment based visas to be issued. And based on how annual caps are counted and met, many EB based visas have been lost. (~500,000 in the last few years per the Ombudsman's office i.e. almost 4 years worth of visas). This has created a chicken and an egg problem. Because of the USCIS delays, the visa numbers have cumulatively got lost and there is no way to recapture them without a legislation change. No one seems to address the former issue. The Congress does not really have anything planned for the recapture to happen. As a result the 4 year backlog will become 5 and 5 will become 6 and so on. Not only are skilled workers left frustrated with stagnant careers, they are also left unheard and asked to look at other greener pastures outside of the US. This is hurting the US economy in many ways but one. Employers such as Microsoft are unable to retain people and therefore opening offices offshore - this will only promote job off shoring that middle class America is most worried about. Action needs to be taken on the part of the USCIS and Congress; else this situation will have ripple effects for many years to come that may reshape the American Society - more in negative ways than positive.
The next issue I wanted to discuss was something even crueler. Apparently people have been fighting for this issue from 1990 under many organizations with Unitefamilies.org being most active. Under the current legislation, a non immigrant long term visa holder such as F1, H1, L1, J1, etc. are allowed to immediately get their families (spouses and children) on similar dependent categories like F4, H4, etc. Also Green Card applicants can add the names of their spouses and children on their AOS applications (I-145) easily and create a primary-derivative pending application. But a Green Card holder who wishes to marry someone can not get his/ her spouse in the United States for over 6 years. The current legislation allows immediate family members such as spouse and children of citizens to be in the country in around 6 to 9 months but not so much for the permanent resident (PR). This leaves the PR holder with one of two options: live without family for 6 years or move with the family back to another country. The former is resulting in many broken families and against the American history that promotes family values. The latter is not feasible because PR laws require Green Card holders to be in the US for over 6 months a year to maintain the PR status. Is this really what our lawmakers want us to live with - 2 choices that change people's life for the worst?
On further understanding of the issue, I realize that legislation change is needed to allow reuniting families. This needs to be sorted out, I want the lawmakers to consider people who became PRs through an H1 or L1 employment route be given the benefit of getting their families more easily since they had those benefits when on the Non-Immigrant Visa. Then why stop a permanent resident from being with his/ her family? The lawmakers may be concerned that allowing all Green card holders to do so will increase the misuse of this option and promote marriages of convenience; but the beneficiaries through employment category should be allowed because they could avail of it while in the pending state in any case. This needs a legislation change and may address a big chunk of the issue at hand.
The one last scenario that I feel is a no brainier and needs no legislation change but more of a USCIS policy change is very straight forward and it becomes more relevant in this age of retrogression. This is the reason why my friend was unhappy and I have a feeling I may end up in this situation too and therefore will use myself as an example:
Based on yesterday's announcement I apply for my AOS. As mentioned in earlier emails the benefits of the AOS pending let me come out a of a stagnant career path. I am single and 30 years old. Since I do not have a wife, my application has no derivative. 2 months down the line I find the love of my life and get married in 3-4 months - before my AOS has been approved. Now I want to have my wife get the benefit of the AOS as well such that I can get her the Green Card too - to avoid the 6 year waiting time she will have if I apply after I get approved. But by then the retrogression dates move back again and my PD is not current anymore. Per the current USCIS process one can not apply for AOS if the date is not current. That process is also extrapolated to derivative applicants where the primary is pending and therefore the derivative has to wait for the dates to get current. The problem with this issue is that because no one has visibility into how USCIS approves application the primary may get approved as soon as the dates become current before the derivative could apply for the AOS. The derivative will not be able to apply for AOS and will have to go back of the country and wait outside for 6 years to file using the other path. Even though the marriage took place before the primary got approved but a process guideline prevents the derivative to apply. This is a very cruel process for people who are about to get married but do not want to risk a broken family and are delaying filing their AOS even though the visa bulletin allows them to. God knows when this window will open again. My friend has to choose between filing his own AOS or marriage. A simple process update can help us fix this situation. While the USCIS and people are still debating allowing filing of 485s with retrogressed PDs, this is a side issue that is recommending allowing filing of 485 for derivatives ASAP (instead of waiting for the primary's PD to become current again) if the 485 of the primary is already pending to avoid long waiting years for a couple to be together.
After hearing this issue, I am worried. My AOS was sent on Jul 2 and I am considering getting married by October. My PD is Dec 2004 EB2 India and may stay retrogressed for sometime. Per current process I will not be able to add my wife until my PD becomes current again and fear that my GC might get approved before I could do that...Ironically I am praying for a delay in my approval just so that I can build a family. This does not need a legislation change but a process review and change by the USCIS. This will help reduce the confusion on interfiled application and also reduce the strain on the 5-6 years of follow-on green cards.
Please feel free to contact me to further understand this issue. Read the following complicated analysis attorney Murthy has laid out to explain this situation: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_retspo.html
Thanks
Gautam
Dear Mr. Gonzalez
I wanted to thank you for the announcement that has brought relief for many of us it is still the beginning of our fight for better processes and improved and updated laws for employment based green cards. I still don't see the light at the end of the tunnel with so many pending applications. I have already been 3 years in the process and my lawyers think I would be out for another 2 if not 3 after having gained premier advanced education from the US. The reasons are many fold. Some are process delays related and some due to statutory guidelines per the legislations. I wanted to document a few issues that if resolved can bring in a lot a relief. Also, I need to introduce you to an issue I was made aware of by a close friend who was surprisingly unhappy with yesterday's announcement.
Process delays on the part of USCIS have caused many delays in employment based visas to be issued. And based on how annual caps are counted and met, many EB based visas have been lost. (~500,000 in the last few years per the Ombudsman's office i.e. almost 4 years worth of visas). This has created a chicken and an egg problem. Because of the USCIS delays, the visa numbers have cumulatively got lost and there is no way to recapture them without a legislation change. No one seems to address the former issue. The Congress does not really have anything planned for the recapture to happen. As a result the 4 year backlog will become 5 and 5 will become 6 and so on. Not only are skilled workers left frustrated with stagnant careers, they are also left unheard and asked to look at other greener pastures outside of the US. This is hurting the US economy in many ways but one. Employers such as Microsoft are unable to retain people and therefore opening offices offshore - this will only promote job off shoring that middle class America is most worried about. Action needs to be taken on the part of the USCIS and Congress; else this situation will have ripple effects for many years to come that may reshape the American Society - more in negative ways than positive.
The next issue I wanted to discuss was something even crueler. Apparently people have been fighting for this issue from 1990 under many organizations with Unitefamilies.org being most active. Under the current legislation, a non immigrant long term visa holder such as F1, H1, L1, J1, etc. are allowed to immediately get their families (spouses and children) on similar dependent categories like F4, H4, etc. Also Green Card applicants can add the names of their spouses and children on their AOS applications (I-145) easily and create a primary-derivative pending application. But a Green Card holder who wishes to marry someone can not get his/ her spouse in the United States for over 6 years. The current legislation allows immediate family members such as spouse and children of citizens to be in the country in around 6 to 9 months but not so much for the permanent resident (PR). This leaves the PR holder with one of two options: live without family for 6 years or move with the family back to another country. The former is resulting in many broken families and against the American history that promotes family values. The latter is not feasible because PR laws require Green Card holders to be in the US for over 6 months a year to maintain the PR status. Is this really what our lawmakers want us to live with - 2 choices that change people's life for the worst?
On further understanding of the issue, I realize that legislation change is needed to allow reuniting families. This needs to be sorted out, I want the lawmakers to consider people who became PRs through an H1 or L1 employment route be given the benefit of getting their families more easily since they had those benefits when on the Non-Immigrant Visa. Then why stop a permanent resident from being with his/ her family? The lawmakers may be concerned that allowing all Green card holders to do so will increase the misuse of this option and promote marriages of convenience; but the beneficiaries through employment category should be allowed because they could avail of it while in the pending state in any case. This needs a legislation change and may address a big chunk of the issue at hand.
The one last scenario that I feel is a no brainier and needs no legislation change but more of a USCIS policy change is very straight forward and it becomes more relevant in this age of retrogression. This is the reason why my friend was unhappy and I have a feeling I may end up in this situation too and therefore will use myself as an example:
Based on yesterday's announcement I apply for my AOS. As mentioned in earlier emails the benefits of the AOS pending let me come out a of a stagnant career path. I am single and 30 years old. Since I do not have a wife, my application has no derivative. 2 months down the line I find the love of my life and get married in 3-4 months - before my AOS has been approved. Now I want to have my wife get the benefit of the AOS as well such that I can get her the Green Card too - to avoid the 6 year waiting time she will have if I apply after I get approved. But by then the retrogression dates move back again and my PD is not current anymore. Per the current USCIS process one can not apply for AOS if the date is not current. That process is also extrapolated to derivative applicants where the primary is pending and therefore the derivative has to wait for the dates to get current. The problem with this issue is that because no one has visibility into how USCIS approves application the primary may get approved as soon as the dates become current before the derivative could apply for the AOS. The derivative will not be able to apply for AOS and will have to go back of the country and wait outside for 6 years to file using the other path. Even though the marriage took place before the primary got approved but a process guideline prevents the derivative to apply. This is a very cruel process for people who are about to get married but do not want to risk a broken family and are delaying filing their AOS even though the visa bulletin allows them to. God knows when this window will open again. My friend has to choose between filing his own AOS or marriage. A simple process update can help us fix this situation. While the USCIS and people are still debating allowing filing of 485s with retrogressed PDs, this is a side issue that is recommending allowing filing of 485 for derivatives ASAP (instead of waiting for the primary's PD to become current again) if the 485 of the primary is already pending to avoid long waiting years for a couple to be together.
After hearing this issue, I am worried. My AOS was sent on Jul 2 and I am considering getting married by October. My PD is Dec 2004 EB2 India and may stay retrogressed for sometime. Per current process I will not be able to add my wife until my PD becomes current again and fear that my GC might get approved before I could do that...Ironically I am praying for a delay in my approval just so that I can build a family. This does not need a legislation change but a process review and change by the USCIS. This will help reduce the confusion on interfiled application and also reduce the strain on the 5-6 years of follow-on green cards.
Please feel free to contact me to further understand this issue. Read the following complicated analysis attorney Murthy has laid out to explain this situation: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_retspo.html
Thanks
Gautam
2011 Auto-Tuning Mazda MX-5 Photos
immi_twinges
07-14 06:47 PM
There are lots of threads on the same topic.
Its very confusing to follow.
We should combine every thing to a single thread
Lest be organised... Just because you can make a new thread just dont make it. Search before you make a new thread.
Be organized:) be prepared
Its very confusing to follow.
We should combine every thing to a single thread
Lest be organised... Just because you can make a new thread just dont make it. Search before you make a new thread.
Be organized:) be prepared
more...
Lou_Sifffer
04-17 11:59 AM
you have to know AS HTML PHP XML XSLT by heart and you have a Deadline
You do?
When did there become a minimum list of things you must know before you can get a job?
Where did this list come from?
You do?
When did there become a minimum list of things you must know before you can get a job?
Where did this list come from?
whitecollarslave
02-10 02:15 PM
EAD is like a carrot in front of the cart. GC is like eating the carrot.
more...
GCNaseeb
10-16 03:24 PM
Its risky to change job (other than same or similar) using AC21 Rule:
Here's an extracts from Shusterman.
"To determine whether the new job is the same or similar to the old job, the USCIS consults the Labor Department Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) or the online O*NET Classification System (one of the two), or similar publications. The memo prohibits INS officers from denying I-485 based on failure to demonstrate that the new job is in the same or a similar occupation as the initial job unless they have consulted, on a case-by-case basis with USCIS headquarters."
Shusterman.com links to the memo at http://shusterman.com/toc-gc.html#2A1 and to the DOT and the O*NET from http://shusterman.com/toc-dol.html#7.
Here's an extracts from Shusterman.
"To determine whether the new job is the same or similar to the old job, the USCIS consults the Labor Department Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) or the online O*NET Classification System (one of the two), or similar publications. The memo prohibits INS officers from denying I-485 based on failure to demonstrate that the new job is in the same or a similar occupation as the initial job unless they have consulted, on a case-by-case basis with USCIS headquarters."
Shusterman.com links to the memo at http://shusterman.com/toc-gc.html#2A1 and to the DOT and the O*NET from http://shusterman.com/toc-dol.html#7.
2010 Mazda MX5 Anti-Roll Bar - Rear
walking_dude
11-24 05:33 PM
Let bygones be bygones. No point in beating the dead horse. Nothing will be achieved by opening old wounds.
Let us be united from now on for all our sakes ( both Eb2 and Eb3)
Agreed but this should be from both the side.
Most of us talk about unity till it suits us ( and i dont mean walking_dude, i am aware of the great service has done, including the fight to ammend the drivers license issue).
Let us be united from now on for all our sakes ( both Eb2 and Eb3)
Agreed but this should be from both the side.
Most of us talk about unity till it suits us ( and i dont mean walking_dude, i am aware of the great service has done, including the fight to ammend the drivers license issue).
more...
sanjay
08-14 09:11 AM
Count me in. I am EB2 India with PD Aug 2004. But I have lot of friends who are struck in EB-3 I.
I live in DC area and I can spare some time to meet lawmakers.
I live in DC area and I can spare some time to meet lawmakers.
hair 2006 Mazda MX-5 Limited
houston2005
07-10 10:19 PM
Thanks for your amazing help.
I have two more question that I am not sure about:
1-I understand from your letter that EB2-NIW has less requirements than EB1-OR, and hence it is more safe to apply for EB2-NIW. Is that true?
2-In case I want to apply for EB1-OR, does my company has to sign I-140. I am just worried that they does not want to sponsor me till after 3 years? Does I-140 hurt the company by any means?
Thank you,
John
In EB1, there is a category Aliens of Extraordinary Ability where you don't need employer sponsorship.
I have two more question that I am not sure about:
1-I understand from your letter that EB2-NIW has less requirements than EB1-OR, and hence it is more safe to apply for EB2-NIW. Is that true?
2-In case I want to apply for EB1-OR, does my company has to sign I-140. I am just worried that they does not want to sponsor me till after 3 years? Does I-140 hurt the company by any means?
Thank you,
John
In EB1, there is a category Aliens of Extraordinary Ability where you don't need employer sponsorship.
more...
fcres
07-20 11:15 AM
In my company, my friend had the same issue. Our attorney as ked him to get a new one...ask your parents to get a new one and send you the scanned copy..in this way..it will be very quick. If you need a format, PM me..I can sedn you.
Gotgc, i sent you a PM. Please respond.
Gotgc, i sent you a PM. Please respond.
hot MAZDA MX 5 FRONT TUNING BUMPER
maddipati1
12-03 03:33 PM
dvb123, good one, thx for posting, very useful,
please post the link to the source
10/31/2008: PERM Filing Alert for IT Occupations and Certain Professional Occupations
please post the link to the source
10/31/2008: PERM Filing Alert for IT Occupations and Certain Professional Occupations
more...
house Mazda MX5 JDL Tuning Rear
GCVivek
03-29 04:52 PM
No, I did not misunderstand. That reply had no quote included and therefore was directed to the person who opened the thread (see very first post from AkhiChopra) and that has everything to do with salary. :o
I think you misunderstood. The OP is talking about his friend, his company and payment from clients. It has nothing to do with salary
I think you misunderstood. The OP is talking about his friend, his company and payment from clients. It has nothing to do with salary
tattoo Presenting the Mazda MX-5 with
dpsg
04-09 12:45 PM
You put it in excellent words. Hopefully we see more diversity in future &
concerted effort to get to it.
The IV is about issues/problems of employment based immigrants, and the goal is to get support as much as possible from every corner in this country to further the cause. Everyone who supports this cause fit in to some category (within legal limits - pro, anti, this group, that lobby, this ethincity, that nationality, etc.), and that does not mean we are promoting something or have preferences for a group. In my opinion any support (with in the legal framework) to the cause of IV from any corner in this country is welcome and should be appreciated.
concerted effort to get to it.
The IV is about issues/problems of employment based immigrants, and the goal is to get support as much as possible from every corner in this country to further the cause. Everyone who supports this cause fit in to some category (within legal limits - pro, anti, this group, that lobby, this ethincity, that nationality, etc.), and that does not mean we are promoting something or have preferences for a group. In my opinion any support (with in the legal framework) to the cause of IV from any corner in this country is welcome and should be appreciated.
more...
pictures Mazda MX-5 Aston Martin
ebizash
07-07 12:00 PM
Hi,
My attorney received an EVL RFE for my I-485 case. My PD is 2007 EB3 so I don't have any hope of getting GC but I guess they are just pre-adjucating my case.
Here is my situation - I filed my !-485 in Aug 2007 and changed job (without filing any AC-21 paperwork with USCIS) in April 2008. My attorney had looked at new job description and given green signal for change. My entire immigration history of 10 years in US is totally clean with no gaps and with all work autorizations.
Now, my concern is that the letter that my attorney has prepared for my current employer to sign has lot of legal lingo (AC-21 language, lot of CFRs, info related to my LCA and I-140) and has some language to the effect of supporting my LCA and I-140 till my GC is approved. It also states that my current employer was able to afford to pay my salary since the LCA date. My employer is fortune 5 company so money wise there is no problem but my concern is that they may not want to sign such a lengthy (wordy) legal doc without consulting their Immi attorney. I don't have much time to respond (only 8 more days). So if my employer takes long time or tells me that they can not sign it, I want to be ready with Plan B. Can someone suggest what should I do?
1 - should I prepare a simple document with job duties, responsibilities, start date, salary etc that my employer will be willing to sign. So at last moment I can atleast get that signed. Something will be better than nothing.
2 - Should I / (bigger question is can I) ask USCIS to give me more time to respond to RFE?
3. Provide simple letter from employer with an affedavit or something stating that the new job is same / similar as the old job.
Sorry for a long post and thanks for any suggestions.
My attorney received an EVL RFE for my I-485 case. My PD is 2007 EB3 so I don't have any hope of getting GC but I guess they are just pre-adjucating my case.
Here is my situation - I filed my !-485 in Aug 2007 and changed job (without filing any AC-21 paperwork with USCIS) in April 2008. My attorney had looked at new job description and given green signal for change. My entire immigration history of 10 years in US is totally clean with no gaps and with all work autorizations.
Now, my concern is that the letter that my attorney has prepared for my current employer to sign has lot of legal lingo (AC-21 language, lot of CFRs, info related to my LCA and I-140) and has some language to the effect of supporting my LCA and I-140 till my GC is approved. It also states that my current employer was able to afford to pay my salary since the LCA date. My employer is fortune 5 company so money wise there is no problem but my concern is that they may not want to sign such a lengthy (wordy) legal doc without consulting their Immi attorney. I don't have much time to respond (only 8 more days). So if my employer takes long time or tells me that they can not sign it, I want to be ready with Plan B. Can someone suggest what should I do?
1 - should I prepare a simple document with job duties, responsibilities, start date, salary etc that my employer will be willing to sign. So at last moment I can atleast get that signed. Something will be better than nothing.
2 - Should I / (bigger question is can I) ask USCIS to give me more time to respond to RFE?
3. Provide simple letter from employer with an affedavit or something stating that the new job is same / similar as the old job.
Sorry for a long post and thanks for any suggestions.
dresses mx5 tuning, mx-5 tuning,
addsf345
11-12 02:09 PM
USCIS is already aware of this. They have been notified through AILA and our letters are also working. IV has also been pushing for more broader AC21 regulations for a few months now.
Our request from IV is to keep sending the letters. Please send letters in thousands - not like 50 to 60 letters.
Everyone must take initiative and push other members. It is a very importasnt campaign.
It is very much possible that a lot of you may be a victim of AC21 denials. It is your call.
Please take responsibility and everyone must come forward and bring others also into this campaign.
This is encouraging. chandu, I read somewhere (mostly on murhty) that CIS will be publishing new AC21 soon and it is expected to be more stricter. Is this just the speculation or any other indications are received?? any idea? I am afraid that what will happen to people who already have used AC21 by following what currently exists???????
Our request from IV is to keep sending the letters. Please send letters in thousands - not like 50 to 60 letters.
Everyone must take initiative and push other members. It is a very importasnt campaign.
It is very much possible that a lot of you may be a victim of AC21 denials. It is your call.
Please take responsibility and everyone must come forward and bring others also into this campaign.
This is encouraging. chandu, I read somewhere (mostly on murhty) that CIS will be publishing new AC21 soon and it is expected to be more stricter. Is this just the speculation or any other indications are received?? any idea? I am afraid that what will happen to people who already have used AC21 by following what currently exists???????
more...
makeup Mazda Mx-5
babu123
10-19 11:24 AM
Lets wish all of us get GC approved in the next two and half years.
girlfriend The MX-5 Picture Thread
paskal
01-27 12:18 AM
there is a gross misconception that iv is focusing "only" on 485 filing. and repeating is ad libidum is not helping.
the 485 measure is a short term tactical decision.it was taken after it became clear that nothing else could be added to an appropriation bill currently.remember that the attitude of the majority is to have a comprehensive bill ONLY.
certain members took to angrily denouncing the whole idea leading to a great deal of unpleasantness, of course the fault was on both sides as no tolerance for the opposing opinion was shown. it's sad though that some of these people now bad mouth iv on other forums.
as long as we insist on bickering and being divided, we will never succeed
let's just stop now, if that's all everyone wants to do on a daily basis. we can all stew in our own sweet juices for the next 20 years...WAITING.
the 485 measure is a short term tactical decision.it was taken after it became clear that nothing else could be added to an appropriation bill currently.remember that the attitude of the majority is to have a comprehensive bill ONLY.
certain members took to angrily denouncing the whole idea leading to a great deal of unpleasantness, of course the fault was on both sides as no tolerance for the opposing opinion was shown. it's sad though that some of these people now bad mouth iv on other forums.
as long as we insist on bickering and being divided, we will never succeed
let's just stop now, if that's all everyone wants to do on a daily basis. we can all stew in our own sweet juices for the next 20 years...WAITING.
hairstyles Mazda MX 5 NBFL
karanp25
06-14 07:23 PM
Just saw a soft LUD today. No status change from yesterday though.
fundo14 - how long has it been since it was transfered to the Des Moines office? Have you called and spoken to an IO about this change?
Same here. I saw another soft LUD today 6/14 after a LUD yesterday 6/13. Wonder if USCIS works on Sat or it's just some regular database update.
fundo14 - how long has it been since it was transfered to the Des Moines office? Have you called and spoken to an IO about this change?
Same here. I saw another soft LUD today 6/14 after a LUD yesterday 6/13. Wonder if USCIS works on Sat or it's just some regular database update.
waitingnwaiting
05-09 09:28 AM
I disagree with waitingnwaiting. I had got 221G about 5 years back. I work for one of the fortune 500 company and had all the paperwork sent by our company's professional law firm. US embassy randomly picks application for processing. It took abt a month to get the approval. As long as the application/documentation is correct and there is nothing to worry.
I would suggest to spend more relaxed time with family or going out which we rarely get with 3-4 weeks vacation.
It does not matter if you work for fortune 500. There could still be fraud or suspecion. Read Indian IT cos face US visa fraud woes - Corporate News - livemint.com (http://www.livemint.com/2011/04/11164715/indian-it-cos-face-us-visa-fra.html)
I would suggest to spend more relaxed time with family or going out which we rarely get with 3-4 weeks vacation.
It does not matter if you work for fortune 500. There could still be fraud or suspecion. Read Indian IT cos face US visa fraud woes - Corporate News - livemint.com (http://www.livemint.com/2011/04/11164715/indian-it-cos-face-us-visa-fra.html)
anilsal
08-27 12:51 PM
from IL who have not yet registered?
No comments:
Post a Comment