smisachu
01-02 02:09 AM
See my answers below. Best of Luck!!
My new year begins with another immigration issue..need some urgent advice.
My wife went to the US Consulate in Chennai today for her first time H-1 stamping. She completed her Phd in Biology from the US and has been working for almost a year for a US biotech company. The consular officer has asked her to submit additional information -221(g); mostly about her job and the company. I can't understand it! Most of the information asked has already been submitted to the INS in reponse to a H-1 RFE.
My wife has an Advance Parole document and EAD based on my I-485 application.
Can you suggest options for her?
1. can she forget about the H-1, not respond to the 221(g) and travel back on advance parole and start working on EAD?
Yes she can. She need not respond and can travel back on AP. However consult an attorney on how to withdraw the visa application, so the record is straight.
2. If after submission of 221(g) her visa gets rejected, can she still use the Advance Parole to travel to US and work on her EAD?
Yes. AP and H1 have no relation to each other. She has an approved H1, so she can enter on AP and still work on H1. This is valid if she withdraws her H1 stamping application, if the visa gets rejected-consult an attorney about the use of H1 after rejection.3. Any other options/advice?[/QUOTE]
My new year begins with another immigration issue..need some urgent advice.
My wife went to the US Consulate in Chennai today for her first time H-1 stamping. She completed her Phd in Biology from the US and has been working for almost a year for a US biotech company. The consular officer has asked her to submit additional information -221(g); mostly about her job and the company. I can't understand it! Most of the information asked has already been submitted to the INS in reponse to a H-1 RFE.
My wife has an Advance Parole document and EAD based on my I-485 application.
Can you suggest options for her?
1. can she forget about the H-1, not respond to the 221(g) and travel back on advance parole and start working on EAD?
Yes she can. She need not respond and can travel back on AP. However consult an attorney on how to withdraw the visa application, so the record is straight.
2. If after submission of 221(g) her visa gets rejected, can she still use the Advance Parole to travel to US and work on her EAD?
Yes. AP and H1 have no relation to each other. She has an approved H1, so she can enter on AP and still work on H1. This is valid if she withdraws her H1 stamping application, if the visa gets rejected-consult an attorney about the use of H1 after rejection.3. Any other options/advice?[/QUOTE]
wallpaper ignition r kelly wiki
Scythe
12-02 04:25 PM
Are you not allowed to vote for yourself?
EDIT: Oh, right, I forgot about your plan to wait and see which one of yours you should vote for.
EDIT: Oh, right, I forgot about your plan to wait and see which one of yours you should vote for.
prince_waiting
10-17 03:43 PM
Fellow IVians,
I was completely unaware of the fact that USPS does not forward USCIS mail to the forwarding address. I moved about a couple of months back and have been receiving my mail to the new address since then.
My checks were encashed on the 12th of October, so I guess I would be receiving my receipts soon. But if the RN is not delivered to me and goes back to the USCIS will they consider my application to be abondoned? I have already executed G-28 forms and is it OK if my lawyer receives a copy of the RN.
Also anybody has any idea if the USPS can hold my mail for a certain amount of time. I guess they do but just wanted to clarify.
Thanks
I was completely unaware of the fact that USPS does not forward USCIS mail to the forwarding address. I moved about a couple of months back and have been receiving my mail to the new address since then.
My checks were encashed on the 12th of October, so I guess I would be receiving my receipts soon. But if the RN is not delivered to me and goes back to the USCIS will they consider my application to be abondoned? I have already executed G-28 forms and is it OK if my lawyer receives a copy of the RN.
Also anybody has any idea if the USPS can hold my mail for a certain amount of time. I guess they do but just wanted to clarify.
Thanks
2011 R. Kelly - Ignition
sunny1000
02-03 05:37 PM
Hi EveryOne,
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
Congrats ivar! Good luck and God bless.
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
Congrats ivar! Good luck and God bless.
more...
amitga
02-10 06:52 PM
UK is at lease clear what is their immigration policy. I would like to have similar stand from US Govt where they come out and say in clear words "we don't want to in here" OR "Come here, work for 6 years and leave" OR "we cant you to stay and fix the GC process.
gccovet
10-30 12:41 PM
Folks,
Iam starting this new thread so that people will know what are the pros and cons leaving a company once GC is approved.
1.What are all the things to be noted while leaving the company after getting GC.
2.To be specific how long a consultant should be with company after GC is approved.
3.Also once GC is approved and if the consultant is off the payroll for say 2 to 3 months will there be any problem while filing for citizen ship.
Shr1,
I guess, you must be already "Greened" :-).
May I ask you to spare few minutes of your time to read and do the follwing Action Item, if you already done so, thank you!.
check out http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22182
We request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...d.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=21716
GCCovet
Iam starting this new thread so that people will know what are the pros and cons leaving a company once GC is approved.
1.What are all the things to be noted while leaving the company after getting GC.
2.To be specific how long a consultant should be with company after GC is approved.
3.Also once GC is approved and if the consultant is off the payroll for say 2 to 3 months will there be any problem while filing for citizen ship.
Shr1,
I guess, you must be already "Greened" :-).
May I ask you to spare few minutes of your time to read and do the follwing Action Item, if you already done so, thank you!.
check out http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22182
We request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...d.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=21716
GCCovet
more...
Higcoptimist
05-15 09:05 PM
Hi,
Well, Bush has delivered his address on the immigration subject. Unless I am missing something, not a word was said about the Legal Immigration or the H1Bs. All the focus was on the illegal immigrants and the border enforcement.
Does that mean that the Legal ones like us are in the backburner? Would the Senate and the house focus only on the illegals and give them the path to citizenship, leaving those who played by the rules, in the lurch? What kind of justice is this in the "Land of Justice"?
I hope the senators and the representatives are sensible and leave the provisions for the EBs in the proposed bill, alone.
Hoping for the best.
Higcoptimist
Well, Bush has delivered his address on the immigration subject. Unless I am missing something, not a word was said about the Legal Immigration or the H1Bs. All the focus was on the illegal immigrants and the border enforcement.
Does that mean that the Legal ones like us are in the backburner? Would the Senate and the house focus only on the illegals and give them the path to citizenship, leaving those who played by the rules, in the lurch? What kind of justice is this in the "Land of Justice"?
I hope the senators and the representatives are sensible and leave the provisions for the EBs in the proposed bill, alone.
Hoping for the best.
Higcoptimist
2010 Ignition Remix by R Kelly filmed by: Kelly Crissman.
freeskier89
03-02 10:17 AM
Just out of curiousity, does traditional painting qualify?
more...
![r kelly ignition album. R. Kelly — Ignition [remix]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOpoMumMGc5DrBGdIbAN-PbWUp3Hh2MXJuIDN7NIFXKuLbczBa_EbxDZRIASwv77ui_TJBPWeJCRi78eUMq3DF_k_C-Wd_MtxbTJ60o5GIWLxyoGirwdvp2NWUx32zOdyX85qXoyZerb0/s400/MBD.jpg "R. Kelly — Ignition [remix]")
kprgroup
08-10 09:02 AM
Good Morning,
I went to the uscis local office. The officer told my case SRC-****7236 (765) Renewal was denied on 06/25/2010. He didn’t have the denial details. He told he will send an email to Texas USCIS asking the details. He also told my 485 motion approved and my recent travel document approved but strange that they denied EAD.
Unfortunately we (Myself & Lawyer) never received a denial notice.
My EAD is expiring sep 3rd. I know mostly they denied by without seeing my 485 motion approval.I am requesting denial notice by opening SR
Help me and suggest to overcome this SITUATION (Another wrong denial by USCIS.)
Thanks
KPR
-----------------
Background OF Myself
----------------------
1)Worked for Company A from 2003 to 2008.
2)Company A applied I-140 and approved April 2006. AOS 485 filed on July 2007. Got EAD but never used it
3)September 2008 I have Joined employer “B” by transferring H1B (Valid until Aug 2010).
4)Employer A revoked 140 which triggered 485 denials in October 2008.
5)Applied MTR and it was approved in NOVEMBER 2008 and 485 reopened.
I went to the uscis local office. The officer told my case SRC-****7236 (765) Renewal was denied on 06/25/2010. He didn’t have the denial details. He told he will send an email to Texas USCIS asking the details. He also told my 485 motion approved and my recent travel document approved but strange that they denied EAD.
Unfortunately we (Myself & Lawyer) never received a denial notice.
My EAD is expiring sep 3rd. I know mostly they denied by without seeing my 485 motion approval.I am requesting denial notice by opening SR
Help me and suggest to overcome this SITUATION (Another wrong denial by USCIS.)
Thanks
KPR
-----------------
Background OF Myself
----------------------
1)Worked for Company A from 2003 to 2008.
2)Company A applied I-140 and approved April 2006. AOS 485 filed on July 2007. Got EAD but never used it
3)September 2008 I have Joined employer “B” by transferring H1B (Valid until Aug 2010).
4)Employer A revoked 140 which triggered 485 denials in October 2008.
5)Applied MTR and it was approved in NOVEMBER 2008 and 485 reopened.
hair r kelly with Trc album
pappu
05-31 04:33 PM
After seeing United to Secure America's lobbying expenses- 600K, I feel we are very lucky to have achieved so much within a meagre amount. I am sure lobbying is very expensive and there was no way we could have hired a firm. We should thank QGA to have agreed to help us out.
more...
gc_check
01-08 10:39 AM
I used standard 2x2. Its mentioned at their website too.
Thanks for quick response.
Thanks for quick response.
hot R. Kelly Songs
kminkeller
03-09 04:17 PM
Thanks guys. Thanks a lot for all these information.
So for Consular processing I need to go back to my country and get it done through the Embassy right? What are the chances of getting denied? Also, what are the chances of getting your labor and I140 denied? If GOD forbid, it got denied, will my EAD still be valid and my EB3 application still be in the place? will it jeopardize my EB3 application?
Thanks.
So for Consular processing I need to go back to my country and get it done through the Embassy right? What are the chances of getting denied? Also, what are the chances of getting your labor and I140 denied? If GOD forbid, it got denied, will my EAD still be valid and my EB3 application still be in the place? will it jeopardize my EB3 application?
Thanks.
more...
house R. Kelly#39;s third album
eagerr2i
07-16 11:37 PM
W-2 is from the employer, that you got paid. Tax return is form 1040 you filed with IRS
tattoo It#39;s like R. Kelly in reverse.
BharatPremi
10-19 01:40 PM
LC Salary:- $85,000
LC Location:- New York
New Job Salary:- $74,000
New job Title and Job duties are same.
Is it advisable to invoke AC21 when new job salary is less than original LC salary but more than prevailing wage of new location.
As per Aytes memo there should not be substantial salary difference. Has anyone invoked AC21 when new job salary is less than LC salary.
I've consulted few immigration laywer and the opinion differs.
Experts.... Please help
My opinion not legal advise: One can join other employer after 180 days from the 485 Receipt date with same or high salary than prevailing wage,keeping job description and Job code similar to use AC21. If you feel you are following this then you will be fine otherwise doomed.
Only confusion remains is this: When you filed LC with current employer at that time prevailing wage was 85K so
your "LC Salary" is 85K. Now say after 5 years seeing the economic condition of the
overall job market if DOL has made prevailing wage say for an example "$74K" for the
same job code now then what? In this case should your AC21 be denied or accepted? If
some expert can guide us, we would highly appreciate for this scenario.
Notes:
1) Remuneration, bonus etc do not fit the definition of "wage". So I would negotiate 20K higher job with wage equal
to current wage and 20k bonus if I can.
2) Geographic location should not matter while changing the employer.
LC Location:- New York
New Job Salary:- $74,000
New job Title and Job duties are same.
Is it advisable to invoke AC21 when new job salary is less than original LC salary but more than prevailing wage of new location.
As per Aytes memo there should not be substantial salary difference. Has anyone invoked AC21 when new job salary is less than LC salary.
I've consulted few immigration laywer and the opinion differs.
Experts.... Please help
My opinion not legal advise: One can join other employer after 180 days from the 485 Receipt date with same or high salary than prevailing wage,keeping job description and Job code similar to use AC21. If you feel you are following this then you will be fine otherwise doomed.
Only confusion remains is this: When you filed LC with current employer at that time prevailing wage was 85K so
your "LC Salary" is 85K. Now say after 5 years seeing the economic condition of the
overall job market if DOL has made prevailing wage say for an example "$74K" for the
same job code now then what? In this case should your AC21 be denied or accepted? If
some expert can guide us, we would highly appreciate for this scenario.
Notes:
1) Remuneration, bonus etc do not fit the definition of "wage". So I would negotiate 20K higher job with wage equal
to current wage and 20k bonus if I can.
2) Geographic location should not matter while changing the employer.
more...
pictures ignition remix
blacktongue
01-20 11:32 AM
Any EB3 here?
Famous American Immigrants � Immigration Update (http://immigrationupdate.wordpress.com/famous-american-immigrants/)
Famous American Immigrants � Immigration Update (http://immigrationupdate.wordpress.com/famous-american-immigrants/)
dresses R. Kelly song #39;Ignition
chanduv23
04-08 04:25 PM
Literally anyone is IV. IV is you and me. We are all collectively IV.
A lot of us have done media interviews in past. Some brought in media contacts, some gave media interviews .... so if you are interested, why don't YOU represent IV and contact media personnel.
This was supposed to be addressed to the OP.
A lot of us have done media interviews in past. Some brought in media contacts, some gave media interviews .... so if you are interested, why don't YOU represent IV and contact media personnel.
This was supposed to be addressed to the OP.
more...
makeup R. Kelly — Ignition [remix]
Googler
06-18 08:23 PM
Instead in CIR Section 531 (COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS) takes away the right for courts to rule on writs of mandamus filings:
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
please please stop reading the old bill
the new one is on the iv home page
or in thomas look at sa.1150 under the s.1358 bill
Thanks for pointing that out Paskal. I stand corrected.
S.A. 1150 Section 216 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:2:./temp/~r110MkRgxl:e138316:) says:
SEC. 216. STREAMLINED PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND CHECKS CONDUCTED FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS.
(a) INFORMATION SHARING; INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--Section 105 (8 U.S.C. 1105) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General shall establish an interagency task force to resolve cases in which an application or petition for an immigration benefit conferred under this Act has been delayed due to an outstanding background check investigation for more than 2 years after the date on which such application or petition was initially filed.
``(2) MEMBERSHIP.--The interagency task force established under paragraph (1) shall include representatives from Federal agencies with immigration, law enforcement, or national security responsibilities under this Act.''.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year, 2008 through 2012 for enhancements to existing systems for conducting background and security checks necessary to support immigration security and orderly processing of applications.
(c) REPORT ON BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on the background and security checks conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on behalf of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
(2) CONTENT.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) a description of the background and security check program;
(B) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays associated with different types of immigration applications;
(C) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays by applicant country of origin; and
(D) the steps that the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking to expedite background and security checks that have been pending for more than 180 days.
Doesn't promise any results and it is not clear if this extra appropriations will be used for the much ballyhooed transformation that Michael Cannon says might kick in in 2010, or for clearing the current backlog BUT is much better than trying to take away the right to file mandamus suits. Also leads us to believe that 180 days is the acceptable amount of time for a namecheck.
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
please please stop reading the old bill
the new one is on the iv home page
or in thomas look at sa.1150 under the s.1358 bill
Thanks for pointing that out Paskal. I stand corrected.
S.A. 1150 Section 216 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:2:./temp/~r110MkRgxl:e138316:) says:
SEC. 216. STREAMLINED PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND CHECKS CONDUCTED FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS.
(a) INFORMATION SHARING; INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--Section 105 (8 U.S.C. 1105) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General shall establish an interagency task force to resolve cases in which an application or petition for an immigration benefit conferred under this Act has been delayed due to an outstanding background check investigation for more than 2 years after the date on which such application or petition was initially filed.
``(2) MEMBERSHIP.--The interagency task force established under paragraph (1) shall include representatives from Federal agencies with immigration, law enforcement, or national security responsibilities under this Act.''.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year, 2008 through 2012 for enhancements to existing systems for conducting background and security checks necessary to support immigration security and orderly processing of applications.
(c) REPORT ON BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on the background and security checks conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on behalf of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
(2) CONTENT.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) a description of the background and security check program;
(B) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays associated with different types of immigration applications;
(C) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays by applicant country of origin; and
(D) the steps that the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking to expedite background and security checks that have been pending for more than 180 days.
Doesn't promise any results and it is not clear if this extra appropriations will be used for the much ballyhooed transformation that Michael Cannon says might kick in in 2010, or for clearing the current backlog BUT is much better than trying to take away the right to file mandamus suits. Also leads us to believe that 180 days is the acceptable amount of time for a namecheck.
girlfriend R.KELLY
Rune
August 27th, 2004, 01:12 AM
Here in Europe the biggest problem is ATMs that has been modified. The most simple modification is a simple loop inserted into the slot that tries to fool its victims into believing the machine ate their card. In addition a helpful person will appear and tell the victim that there's a secret code to be keyed in (999 + personal pin code) to make the machine spit out the card again...
Then they upped the stakes a bit. Today's con-person installs a small card reader at the ATM's slot. In addition there's a small camera (here's the relevant bit) that take pictures as people enter their code. This has been used and such equipment has even been recovered in atleast one case.
As for someone looking over your shoulder in the store, and perhaps even snapping a picture of it... Well, lets just say you don't want to leave your card out of sight. Don't assume your card is worthless plastic in someone else's hands.
We card users are basically using yesterday's (actually: last decade's/century's) technology to access our money while the countless villains out there are armed with today's technology. We're sitting ducks.
The card companies are reluctant to tell us this, but eventually as they roll out new technology (smart cards with bio-signatures) it will become blatantly apparent to everyone. Here in Norway they're scheduled to do this over the next year I think.
Then they upped the stakes a bit. Today's con-person installs a small card reader at the ATM's slot. In addition there's a small camera (here's the relevant bit) that take pictures as people enter their code. This has been used and such equipment has even been recovered in atleast one case.
As for someone looking over your shoulder in the store, and perhaps even snapping a picture of it... Well, lets just say you don't want to leave your card out of sight. Don't assume your card is worthless plastic in someone else's hands.
We card users are basically using yesterday's (actually: last decade's/century's) technology to access our money while the countless villains out there are armed with today's technology. We're sitting ducks.
The card companies are reluctant to tell us this, but eventually as they roll out new technology (smart cards with bio-signatures) it will become blatantly apparent to everyone. Here in Norway they're scheduled to do this over the next year I think.
hairstyles ignition remix lyrics/r. kelly
Ennada
09-13 12:25 PM
EB2 and EB3 at one point were in the same boat. Now that EB2 is advancing and is way ahead of EB3, the EB3 applicants are upset and angry. Their anger is very much justified. However, their anger should not be directed towards EB2 applicants.
As I pointed out in another post, we are all players here and we are all playing by the rules. The system is not fair. Anger should be directed towards the system and not towards EB2s.
"hate the game, don't hate the playa....Chris Rock" is appropriate here.
Most of the EB2s, if not all, are supportive of reform and are supportive towards EB3 friends. The anger may lead to the disruption of this support.
We are all in this together. We all need to stay together.
As I pointed out in another post, we are all players here and we are all playing by the rules. The system is not fair. Anger should be directed towards the system and not towards EB2s.
"hate the game, don't hate the playa....Chris Rock" is appropriate here.
Most of the EB2s, if not all, are supportive of reform and are supportive towards EB3 friends. The anger may lead to the disruption of this support.
We are all in this together. We all need to stay together.
Winner
02-18 11:57 AM
Hello IVans,
My employer did not pay for I485 expenses (USCIS fees, Lawyer expenses and Medical exam expenses). I paid all these expenses out of my pocket. Today one of my friends told me that these expenses could qualify as tax-deductible expenses. I have my doubts, but want to get you thoughts.
Thanks.
My employer did not pay for I485 expenses (USCIS fees, Lawyer expenses and Medical exam expenses). I paid all these expenses out of my pocket. Today one of my friends told me that these expenses could qualify as tax-deductible expenses. I have my doubts, but want to get you thoughts.
Thanks.
drona
07-08 04:12 PM
I have written to Matthew Oh and requested that he mention Immigration Voice and post a link to where people can join in the flower campaign. I will let you know if I get a response if any.
No comments:
Post a Comment