tooclose
07-12 06:59 PM
That may not be true. I had read somewhere (in this forum) that DOS sets up cut-off dates as 01, 08, 14, and 22, and 01 includes from 1st to 7th, 08 includes 8th to 13th, and so on and so forth.
Come August 1st, who knows, (strange are the ways USCIS works) his file may be the first one to be picked up and approved before those of March 05 guys, some of whom are still waiting, like Pitha etal.
You deserve a happy hour if thats true, since my PD falls within that window :)
Come August 1st, who knows, (strange are the ways USCIS works) his file may be the first one to be picked up and approved before those of March 05 guys, some of whom are still waiting, like Pitha etal.
You deserve a happy hour if thats true, since my PD falls within that window :)
wallpaper Wedding Hairstyles For Women
PD_Dec2002
07-05 04:41 PM
nixstor, for all your efforts (and I admire them) here to promote people to join IV and contribute, check what other senior members are doing...they are driving new members (and potential contributors) away.
See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6113. So what if the poster is using a substitute LC? Didn't logiclife quote today that unfortunately life is not fair?
Thanks,
Jayant
See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6113. So what if the poster is using a substitute LC? Didn't logiclife quote today that unfortunately life is not fair?
Thanks,
Jayant
sanju
02-03 12:13 PM
I spoke to Congresswoman Zoe Logfren's staff few days, back and they specifically pointed out on the country quota issue. I'm sure lot of lawmakers are aware about this issue, I wan to give it a try, guys who think it is an unfair system, please PM me, this is my own initiative so no there is no arguement on whether IV supports this or not...
I did want to PM you, but thought of posting it on the open forum. So here is what I have to say.
You are a total jerk because you do not understand, and you do not want to understand that your actions could annoy people and harm the effort. There is a time for everything. Just because we are all feeling the fear of the shrinking economy, doesn't mean that we have to do something, which may even harm the entire effort. Waiting for the right moment is better than doing wrong things at the wrong time and failing.
.
I did want to PM you, but thought of posting it on the open forum. So here is what I have to say.
You are a total jerk because you do not understand, and you do not want to understand that your actions could annoy people and harm the effort. There is a time for everything. Just because we are all feeling the fear of the shrinking economy, doesn't mean that we have to do something, which may even harm the entire effort. Waiting for the right moment is better than doing wrong things at the wrong time and failing.
.
2011 Romantic wedding hairstyle!
crazyghoda
01-16 04:27 PM
My layoff was much less traumatizing at the instant.
I was in India on vacation and one fine day I check my work email to see an email that I was let go a day earlier with 2 weeks of severance.
Luckily I had my AP with me which is what I used to return back instead of the H1. Needless to add my entire remainder of the vacation was ruined in between obsessing about how to come back (try using the H1 even though laid off or use the AP and face secondary inspections) and applying to new jobs.
Well I am back now and looking everywhere. Hopefully something should click soon.
All the best guys!
I was in India on vacation and one fine day I check my work email to see an email that I was let go a day earlier with 2 weeks of severance.
Luckily I had my AP with me which is what I used to return back instead of the H1. Needless to add my entire remainder of the vacation was ruined in between obsessing about how to come back (try using the H1 even though laid off or use the AP and face secondary inspections) and applying to new jobs.
Well I am back now and looking everywhere. Hopefully something should click soon.
All the best guys!
more...
sw33t
01-18 06:39 PM
Are you not authorized to work until new EAD or copy of EAD will suffice... I know everything else is easy to replace.... but USCIS documents takes months...
Should a copy of EAD + DL be sufficient to keep in wallet?? I've lost my wallet once.. so its a scary thought...
Based on your state law, you may be required to carry your original DL and not copies.
Understand that these are technicalities. As long as you are nice, polite, calm and co-operative you have nothing to fear.
EAD is an "EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION DOCUMENT". It is not enough to prove your immigration status. When approached by Border agents, showing your EAD along with all supporting immigration documents (such as H1B, I-140, I-485 Receipt) etc. is required along with a valid passport and a valid US Visa stamp .
Should a copy of EAD + DL be sufficient to keep in wallet?? I've lost my wallet once.. so its a scary thought...
Based on your state law, you may be required to carry your original DL and not copies.
Understand that these are technicalities. As long as you are nice, polite, calm and co-operative you have nothing to fear.
EAD is an "EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION DOCUMENT". It is not enough to prove your immigration status. When approached by Border agents, showing your EAD along with all supporting immigration documents (such as H1B, I-140, I-485 Receipt) etc. is required along with a valid passport and a valid US Visa stamp .
BlueSunD
03-10 12:42 AM
nice image thirdworldman! :thumb:
more...
pitha
01-28 09:39 AM
The original intent of country caps was to prevent one single country from monopolizing the immigration (but this was regular unskilled immigration like family based immigration etc). But when it comes to skill based immigration it is ridiculous to maintain country caps. Everybody including the US government, USCIS and industry know that country caps in skilled category are ridiculous. That is why in H1B they don�t enforce the country caps. Because if they enforce the country caps in H1b the whole H1 program will collapse. I know the difference between h1 and green cards but when you bring people into US on H1 without country caps they should not enforce country caps on H1 to green cards skilled category. The people who are oppose immigration are using this(the country cap or rather quota) as an excuse to make things worse for immigrantion.
2010 Celebrity wedding HAirstyles
guy03062
11-11 07:49 PM
This is great find. I am not sure why IV leadership (as an advocacy group) is not pursuing this to USCIS leadership as they are in touch with them regularly for other issues. Are we missing something here?
Under the regulation No reference to Calendar year. It mentions explicitly calendar quarter.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Under the regulation No reference to Calendar year. It mentions explicitly calendar quarter.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
more...
StarSun
09-10 11:01 AM
One of the main things that could help us to make a correct guess is number of approved and pending I-140s per country per year of priority.
USCIs shouldn't say they don't have this data and we shouldn't say we never requested this
While there is nothing wrong in knowing the correct pending numbers, there is nothing to gain actually from it. If the goal is to guess correctly when you will be current, then this is worthwhile!!
USCIs shouldn't say they don't have this data and we shouldn't say we never requested this
While there is nothing wrong in knowing the correct pending numbers, there is nothing to gain actually from it. If the goal is to guess correctly when you will be current, then this is worthwhile!!
hair wedding hairstyles 2011. If you have, and you#39;re happy to
neelu
12-12 10:48 AM
We have asked an immigration lawyer this question. Someone even quoted all the sections of INA and CFR(code of federal regulations) to make the point -- that you can have regulation changed to file 485.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
more...
sunitharay
08-09 12:20 AM
I am spending sleepless nights worrying...and regarding resubmitting, is it not a waste submitting it twice - will they encash the checks twice?
OR
it seems to be a better idea to just enclose the RN # and submit the EVL separately...
OR
it seems to be a better idea to just enclose the RN # and submit the EVL separately...
hot BLACK WEDDING HAIRSTYLES 2011
feedfront
09-17 02:02 PM
Attorney will contact us as soon as they get letter. They are not going to respond w/o service fee.
Chillax, it's Friday. We'll definitely get it by next week.
Chillax, it's Friday. We'll definitely get it by next week.
more...
house Wedding Hairstyle Updos
nixstor
10-15 08:20 PM
Do not forget to notarize your request. It prevents a frivolous rejection
tattoo Wedding Hairstyles Act 2011 ~ Bridal Hairstyle | Trends
chanduv23
09-26 12:13 PM
Excellent team work IV - now lets all thank her for changing making the correction.
more...
pictures wedding hairstyles for short hair 2011. 2011 wedding hairstyles
McLuvin
03-12 01:55 PM
finally the bulletin has been posted in the DOS website...
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
dresses Wedding Hairstyles For 2011
karanp25
07-14 06:28 PM
Sorry for asking too many questions. One more thing is when did you get this RFE? I am in similar situation---used AC-21 and applied for EAD back in first week of May 2008, but nothing yet from NSC. I was with my GC sponsoring employer for more than 6 months though and I-140 was approved back in 2005.
I filed EAD renewal on May 28 2008.
Service Center: Nebraska
I filed EAD renewal on May 28 2008.
Service Center: Nebraska
more...
makeup bride updo hairstyles 2011.
vin13
11-13 12:27 PM
The 1st quarter ends Dec 31. So technically, USCIS has until that to allocate the total of 35,000 visas. Now, let's assume they have only approved 5000 visas across all categories thus far, then that doesn't mean they can go and allocate the remaining 30,000 in December to the retrogressed countries.
I think the way the spillover works (except for the last month of last quarter) is at the end of the quarter (technically Jan bulletin is published around Dec 15) based on the demand for the last 2 weeks for that quarter, USCIS will spillover visas. So I think we should wait until the Jan bulletin that comes out in December before we push for a lawsuit. If you want to send letters to people, then so be it, but I am pretty sure USCIS is well within its operating procedure wrt spillover. If spillover doesn't happen in the Jan bulletin, then we have ground for a strong case.
I guess we will be fine if they are not able to complete the spillover within the calandar quarter and issue them the month after (except when it is end of fiscal year). I hope you are right that the spillover happens in January for the 1st quarter.
But look at previous visa bulletins. Do you see major movements 4 times a year. Its always the end of the year. So we are asking for clarification on following the law which seems to say that spillover need to happen during the remainder of the calander quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
I think the way the spillover works (except for the last month of last quarter) is at the end of the quarter (technically Jan bulletin is published around Dec 15) based on the demand for the last 2 weeks for that quarter, USCIS will spillover visas. So I think we should wait until the Jan bulletin that comes out in December before we push for a lawsuit. If you want to send letters to people, then so be it, but I am pretty sure USCIS is well within its operating procedure wrt spillover. If spillover doesn't happen in the Jan bulletin, then we have ground for a strong case.
I guess we will be fine if they are not able to complete the spillover within the calandar quarter and issue them the month after (except when it is end of fiscal year). I hope you are right that the spillover happens in January for the 1st quarter.
But look at previous visa bulletins. Do you see major movements 4 times a year. Its always the end of the year. So we are asking for clarification on following the law which seems to say that spillover need to happen during the remainder of the calander quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
girlfriend wedding hairstyles 2011. down wedding hair styles; down wedding hair styles
bharad
02-04 02:38 PM
have sent you a p.m.
hairstyles hot hairstyles 2011 women long
pappu
07-05 11:22 AM
Core is putting their time and mmoney and doing this all for everybody
Pray please tell me what the core did for people stuck in BEC's.
Even these people contributed and once the dates were made current everybody and I'm sorry to say including the core forgot about them.
I know I'll be bashed for wrting this and pls dont get offended but I just had to ask.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
Pray please tell me what the core did for people stuck in BEC's.
Even these people contributed and once the dates were made current everybody and I'm sorry to say including the core forgot about them.
I know I'll be bashed for wrting this and pls dont get offended but I just had to ask.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
varshadas
02-04 08:04 PM
Well Bridgewater temple did not allow us to distribute flyers. Its against their policy. All we could do is stick the flyer on the community bulletin board and give it to the manager and the Vice Chariman of the temple. I got the telephone numbers of the Chairman of PR of the temple. I am going to call her tomorrow. Sanjay and Ajay are going to distribute the flyers at Metropark sometime this week. Sanjay is going to follow up futher with EBC. Ajay is going to follow up with the newspapers. Rajeev, did you try to get in touch with your local congressman? If not, please do so asap and keep pursuing until you get a decision from them. This actually goes for everyone of us. Please follow up with the congressmen until you get a decision from them.
Thanks,
Varsha
Thanks,
Varsha
Naveen
04-07 08:12 AM
Well said! I came back first week of Feb 09 and no issues. Just usual jibber-jabber.
Rumor, rumor, and more rumors. We Indians get a kick out of this stuff, dont we? This actually happened with me couple of weeks ago.
......
Rumor, rumor, and more rumors. We Indians get a kick out of this stuff, dont we? This actually happened with me couple of weeks ago.
......
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar