ajthakur
07-14 05:44 PM
PD: Jan 2006
Category: EB2
Could you inform us what your Eb category is and what is your priority dates.
TIA
Category: EB2
Could you inform us what your Eb category is and what is your priority dates.
TIA
wallpaper I MISS YOU SO MUCH AND I CAN#39;T
vjkypally
03-18 05:05 PM
Its sad ROW EB3 from 06 is worried that EB2 India 03 are getting their GC's.And some are plannin to sue??????
feedfront
10-12 01:33 PM
feedfront
I got an RFE on my 485 on Oct 6th. But I haven't received the letter yet. But, since my TB test turned positive and I had to take an X-ray, I'm wondering if I would get the same RFE on my 485 too. I haven't changed employers nor had any H1B breaks in my 12 year stint here. So, I'm wondering if it would be the same RFE as yours.
In case of an X-Ray missing, couldn't we contact the doctor's office where we did our tests and ask them to mail it again? Or should we do it once again now? I did my tests in 2004, so I'm not even sure if they have copies of my X-rays with them.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Hi 'akilhere',
You should go for new medical report as last one is too old. For vaccinations, you can use your last report but for TB and other blood test, you should go for recent.
I'm not sure whether RFE would be for medical report. In my case, my civil surgeon was not in USCIS's current list of authorised civil surgeons and somehow, my x-ray report was missing from report also.
It may be EVL. In either case, it is easy work as you have not changed your employer (no AC-21 issue).
I got an RFE on my 485 on Oct 6th. But I haven't received the letter yet. But, since my TB test turned positive and I had to take an X-ray, I'm wondering if I would get the same RFE on my 485 too. I haven't changed employers nor had any H1B breaks in my 12 year stint here. So, I'm wondering if it would be the same RFE as yours.
In case of an X-Ray missing, couldn't we contact the doctor's office where we did our tests and ask them to mail it again? Or should we do it once again now? I did my tests in 2004, so I'm not even sure if they have copies of my X-rays with them.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Hi 'akilhere',
You should go for new medical report as last one is too old. For vaccinations, you can use your last report but for TB and other blood test, you should go for recent.
I'm not sure whether RFE would be for medical report. In my case, my civil surgeon was not in USCIS's current list of authorised civil surgeons and somehow, my x-ray report was missing from report also.
It may be EVL. In either case, it is easy work as you have not changed your employer (no AC-21 issue).
2011 I miss those blue eyes,
pappu
04-23 10:18 AM
This meeting was a success since IV was able to display support for the bill and also then follow up after the meeting. IV core members worked hard to make this event a success and we are happy to report this. We did get an irresponsible member gautamagg in this event by using IV's name and asking a wrong question. This Q and A session should have been used to talk about the general issues of the organization members and that IV fully supports the bill that brings relief to us. And not asking if this congressman can get me a F1 visa because I don't want to spend $100 and ask this question to a lawyer. Or saying I am getting a 100K salary now and if I get my greencard I can get 120K salary and I am very depressed because of that. It is really tough to discipline everyone coming to the meetings and making sure each question will be well thought of and coordinated. There are definitely some lessons learnt after such representations in public meetings.
Many thanks to gsc999 for bringing a banner and wearing IV t-shirt. We also want to acknowledge his contributions of over $1K to immigrationvoice and wish we have more members like him. Many thanks to members who helped us call all CA members and ensured we have a good turnout. Our success will be very close if we have such committed and responsible members.
Members are requested to be mature and responsible in such meetings. If you are using IV’s name and IV has invited you for the meeting, you are representing all 10,700+ members and you are their voice.
Many thanks to gsc999 for bringing a banner and wearing IV t-shirt. We also want to acknowledge his contributions of over $1K to immigrationvoice and wish we have more members like him. Many thanks to members who helped us call all CA members and ensured we have a good turnout. Our success will be very close if we have such committed and responsible members.
Members are requested to be mature and responsible in such meetings. If you are using IV’s name and IV has invited you for the meeting, you are representing all 10,700+ members and you are their voice.
more...
McGuffin
03-06 04:25 PM
I don't think I'll be able to make this one, I'll give it a shot though.
pappu
06-14 08:47 AM
/\/\/
more...
MDix
03-10 02:33 PM
From July-07 fiasco DOS and USICS work very closely on VB, I am referring to USCI and DOS. And USCIS is the one who influence DOS decision.
Since you chose to not to answer my question, I assume you have no idea what you are talking about.
Please ignore MDix.
Since you chose to not to answer my question, I assume you have no idea what you are talking about.
Please ignore MDix.
2010 i miss you kiss. i miss you
eilsoe
02-22 02:42 AM
do we have a set date for the deadline? I haven't worked on my entry for the past... since I threw up that WIP, and I only have today and tomorrow to work on it.
basically I'm just gonna throw in a train (if I can make one), and some more details... maybe some newspapers lying about... and stuff like that...
basically I'm just gonna throw in a train (if I can make one), and some more details... maybe some newspapers lying about... and stuff like that...
more...
Legal
07-04 08:40 PM
I dont think lost GC numbers can be revived, After a Fiscal year is over the GC's are dead.
new legislation is needed to change that.
new legislation is needed to change that.
hair i miss you kiss. i miss you
h1_b_visa_holder
05-23 10:39 AM
Don't know about others.... but surely not at MIT ! MIT has no program "totally on Web"... :)
I am sure MIT (Manipal Intitute of Technology , Marathwada Institute of Technology) has online programs :)
I am sure MIT (Manipal Intitute of Technology , Marathwada Institute of Technology) has online programs :)
more...
va_217
01-18 11:24 AM
same happened to me in Elpaso airport longtime back, I guess when you are coming from Mexico they do that.
but no questions asked it was normal
thanks
but no questions asked it was normal
thanks
hot I miss you kiss
Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
more...
house house I miss you do you miss
stucklabor
07-24 10:15 PM
.. there should definitely be some policy interpretation at the discretion of the USCIS
1) The law does not explicitly state that the visa number availability is a pre-requisite for filing the application
2) If you are interpreting it based on the words ....
"an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed"
Then according to 245(a)(2)....
"the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and "
....concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 should also be illegal because at the time of filing I-140 there is no determination of whether the alien is eligible to recieve the EB visa. If so how can USCIS allow filing of I-485 at that time.
Dude/Dudette, I give up. The alien's eligibility and admissibility is decided at I-485 stage - FBI name checks, medical tests ring a bell? The law explicitly states that visa number availabililty is a pre-requisite for the adjustment of status application in 245(a)(3). If you can't understand - or choose to refuse to understand - plain English, have fun arguing with yourself.
1) The law does not explicitly state that the visa number availability is a pre-requisite for filing the application
2) If you are interpreting it based on the words ....
"an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed"
Then according to 245(a)(2)....
"the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and "
....concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 should also be illegal because at the time of filing I-140 there is no determination of whether the alien is eligible to recieve the EB visa. If so how can USCIS allow filing of I-485 at that time.
Dude/Dudette, I give up. The alien's eligibility and admissibility is decided at I-485 stage - FBI name checks, medical tests ring a bell? The law explicitly states that visa number availabililty is a pre-requisite for the adjustment of status application in 245(a)(3). If you can't understand - or choose to refuse to understand - plain English, have fun arguing with yourself.
tattoo I miss the way you brush my
vkrishn
07-15 06:02 PM
Interesting that I did fingerprinting only in 2007 Nov/Dec after applying for I485 during the July 2007 fiasco. I have not received any fingerprinting notice since then. Guess I made an impression with my fingers. :)
I wonder why people are getting fingerprinting notices every year? I read a couple of cases about it.
Getting my EAD renewed, even though i am not on it. Renewal Package sent to USCIS.
Getting my AP renewed. Our company Attorney does it even though i don't use it and i am on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
Getting my H-1 renewed as it expires this Oct 10. Finished my 6yrs on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
If i get my I485 Approved in August, then USCIS gets all the money from the renewals that were sent for my case.
I wonder why people are getting fingerprinting notices every year? I read a couple of cases about it.
Getting my EAD renewed, even though i am not on it. Renewal Package sent to USCIS.
Getting my AP renewed. Our company Attorney does it even though i don't use it and i am on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
Getting my H-1 renewed as it expires this Oct 10. Finished my 6yrs on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
If i get my I485 Approved in August, then USCIS gets all the money from the renewals that were sent for my case.
more...
pictures i miss you image
willwin
03-17 03:12 PM
Right. But here USCIS plays its villain role. What happens is USCIS moves clock ahead depending upon last month's "demand." We always think stramline logic.. USCIS does not work that way. It will kick PD to x date for an example Dec 2002. Now at the same time it will keep RD at say for example july 2001..Now it will keep some files eating dust in Name check so end effect is "Some" will get their gC. So next month, seeing this "demand" USCIS will kick PD further.. same game.. I believe at some level it decides seeing it reaching to "3500" limit put a break. So in reality what happen is even though USCIS kicks PD ahead not "all applicants with valid PD" get their GC. If they are unlucky enough to stuck in name check or RD is not being current, they will again wait for years for next kicking cycle start from April 2001.
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
dresses #i love you #i miss you #kiss
meera_godse
01-30 04:27 PM
I would think its not worth going thru that nonsense of H4 to H1 especially with a desi employer.
I agree with you totally. But the sad part is, Try going the normal straight way & nobody entertains you when the companies hear the word "H4". All the work experience gathered over the years suddenly seems like crap in front of the visa status.
Its frustrating.
I agree with you totally. But the sad part is, Try going the normal straight way & nobody entertains you when the companies hear the word "H4". All the work experience gathered over the years suddenly seems like crap in front of the visa status.
Its frustrating.
more...
makeup i miss you kiss. I
quizzer
04-08 04:19 PM
I look at this bill in a different perspective:
1. This will give the Indian IT companies an opportunity to move up the value chain. Rather than body shop its employees to clients...they can have all the IT work done at its development locations. Also they can fill americans for half of its US workforce.
2. It will put an end to 100% H1b bodyshoppers who just make money without having any office and putting their employees onto client locations. These scrupulous bodyshops even dont pay on bench.
Thanks
1. This will give the Indian IT companies an opportunity to move up the value chain. Rather than body shop its employees to clients...they can have all the IT work done at its development locations. Also they can fill americans for half of its US workforce.
2. It will put an end to 100% H1b bodyshoppers who just make money without having any office and putting their employees onto client locations. These scrupulous bodyshops even dont pay on bench.
Thanks
girlfriend pictures I miss you ) @ Happy
xlr8r
06-11 08:55 AM
Done.
hairstyles I miss you words kiss
chennaikar
03-31 12:20 PM
In the USCIS Ombudsman Report In the USCIS Ombudsman Report http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf
On page 52 it mentions
"
The Grand Total of Employment Preference Numbers Available for Recapture is shown as 218,759 (not 268,759), since it reflects subtraction of 50,000 numbers already recaptured from FY 01 through FY 04.
"
Also there is a break up of per year unused visa numbers from 1992 till 2006.
On page 52 it mentions
"
The Grand Total of Employment Preference Numbers Available for Recapture is shown as 218,759 (not 268,759), since it reflects subtraction of 50,000 numbers already recaptured from FY 01 through FY 04.
"
Also there is a break up of per year unused visa numbers from 1992 till 2006.
new_horizon
10-21 12:03 AM
reasoning with you. I can easily refute all your claims, and also prove my point. but I think it'll be a waste of my time. 'coz I am not trying to convert anybody to vote for the repubs. just can't help it, never heard anybody hiring a CEO just because he has experience organizing the company picnic :D . peace.
laborchic
09-12 11:06 AM
So many people in NJ Thread... How many are coming for the rallly....
Please forrward the Businessweek article to everyone.. This may give us a good bump in increasing the attendance..
Please forrward the Businessweek article to everyone.. This may give us a good bump in increasing the attendance..
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar