gc_chahiye
07-26 11:17 AM
I would file for 485, but maintain my H1, and bring her here on H4. A PD of EB3-March-2005 is not going to get current anytime soon, I would not miss out on the option to use AC21 to switch jobs...
wallpaper Tomas plekanec
WeShallOvercome
08-03 12:19 PM
Hopefully we will get them soon! Keeping fingers crossed! Just imagine the wait times for AP, EAD and eventually GC. Just forget about it!
At this time the guys who are seeking company are those who got their checks cleared, you have 99% of july population with you , if that gives you some comfort.
At this time the guys who are seeking company are those who got their checks cleared, you have 99% of july population with you , if that gives you some comfort.
pak
07-27 03:01 PM
If I-485 is rejected, can you switch back to H4 from EAD without going out of USA?
2011 Three times Michael Jackson
samcam
05-23 10:53 AM
Good job Salil..
more...
satyasaich
07-21 09:14 AM
When i was in a fortune 5 earlier in my career, Fragomen & Assc were my attorneys as well. Never had such thing in the past nor heard of it. By the way, thousands of people work from home in a company where i was also working from home till yesterday. ( today 7/21 i don't have a job due to EAD processing delays )
it's just their inability to explain the business model. For example, if you are in IBM, they have only few offices in midwest and most of the people work from home & travel to client site based on necessity. Some of the positions ( suchas DBA / Unix Admin/ Web Admin etc;)doesn't even require presence at client location not even once in an year.
That's how the business model is existing. just because some officers / clerks in USCIS doesn't understand / nor interpret properly the vebiage or context of law, it's their traning issue. worst case scenario, that's why we pay hefty amounts to so called 'immigration attorneys' to 'explain' the law & to work with USCIS officials to do the 'CORRECT' thing
Normally my wife is the one who is used to post or follow up on the latest here.
This came up a week ago. I have been working from home in a different state and we do not have any company office near my home. Nearest office location is about 3 hours. I had to move this far away due to personal reasons.
Now after working from home for 3 years (extending EAD, H1Bs etc) Fragomen (most of you know who they are) says I cannot do work from home anymore due to this conflict with uscis. it seems USCIS doesnt recognize your home as a Govt recognized work location. Hence I cannot work from home.
Now my manager wants me to only work from the office since folks reporting to me are also in that state. Now he is using Fragomen and HR emails as a reason for me to move back.
Anythoughts ? I am sure you all will agree that is the law. but why all this now ? even after working for 12 years.
One other point the fragomen lawyer said is - this is going to be the case for all thier clients.
it's just their inability to explain the business model. For example, if you are in IBM, they have only few offices in midwest and most of the people work from home & travel to client site based on necessity. Some of the positions ( suchas DBA / Unix Admin/ Web Admin etc;)doesn't even require presence at client location not even once in an year.
That's how the business model is existing. just because some officers / clerks in USCIS doesn't understand / nor interpret properly the vebiage or context of law, it's their traning issue. worst case scenario, that's why we pay hefty amounts to so called 'immigration attorneys' to 'explain' the law & to work with USCIS officials to do the 'CORRECT' thing
Normally my wife is the one who is used to post or follow up on the latest here.
This came up a week ago. I have been working from home in a different state and we do not have any company office near my home. Nearest office location is about 3 hours. I had to move this far away due to personal reasons.
Now after working from home for 3 years (extending EAD, H1Bs etc) Fragomen (most of you know who they are) says I cannot do work from home anymore due to this conflict with uscis. it seems USCIS doesnt recognize your home as a Govt recognized work location. Hence I cannot work from home.
Now my manager wants me to only work from the office since folks reporting to me are also in that state. Now he is using Fragomen and HR emails as a reason for me to move back.
Anythoughts ? I am sure you all will agree that is the law. but why all this now ? even after working for 12 years.
One other point the fragomen lawyer said is - this is going to be the case for all thier clients.
letstalklc
11-23 05:17 PM
I have used ICICI money2india 3 years back, but stopped using their serivice because they are not honest in terms of conversion rate always below SBI, so I have switched to SBI's global link services ( SBI Global Link Services - US (http://www.onlinesbi.com/glsus) ), it's really cool thing, rate is better and also they will not float the rate during the day time, just in the morning time, whatever rate you see, they will gives you that, I have verified many times, all the time it matched...I really liked......
more...
GCNaseeb
11-14 09:36 PM
I scheduled an infopass appointment for tomorrow to discuss misspelled name on my EAD and AP. Several of my friends are saying that since these documents carry A #, and picture, in addition to name, I should be fine if I ever need to use them. But I just wanted to play safe, hence took this appointment. Will let you know guys, the outcome of my visit.
2010 Standard screen
lostinbeta
10-20 04:02 PM
Ah, so painter is really the best if you have a tablet, but if you don't have one, then you shouldn't bother????
more...
gc_kaavaali
12-10 11:52 AM
In my view changing employer when you have pending 140 is risky...
any suggestions if 140 is not approved?
Filed in August 2007......doesn't look like there is much movement based on tracker!!!!
EAD in hand
any suggestions if 140 is not approved?
Filed in August 2007......doesn't look like there is much movement based on tracker!!!!
EAD in hand
hair Wallpapers -74 Beautiful Girls
tinuverma
03-18 11:45 AM
I am on H1 (8th year - not using EAD which I have) right now and a citizen friend of mine wants me to be involved with his website company. Business would involve subscription based access to website. He has hinted that one thing he is willing to consider is awarding me some percentage share in the company in return for my services as his website is not yet profitable.
If I would like to take that, what is the way to go?
1. Specifically, can someone tell me what I should do - LLC, something else...?
2. How would I pay myself from this without breaking H1-B laws?
3. If tomorrow I wanna close this company as I dont want to keep it for any reason, is there anything I need to be concerned with? Or it's as easy to close as a simple status update, call, etc?
Thanks
T
If I would like to take that, what is the way to go?
1. Specifically, can someone tell me what I should do - LLC, something else...?
2. How would I pay myself from this without breaking H1-B laws?
3. If tomorrow I wanna close this company as I dont want to keep it for any reason, is there anything I need to be concerned with? Or it's as easy to close as a simple status update, call, etc?
Thanks
T
more...
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
hot Disney Cartoons Minnie Mouse
Munna Bhai
01-09 01:44 PM
NSC is processing 140's filed on or before Apr 6,2007 - Once the processing dates shows your filing date, on 31st day, you can ask your employer to open a service request. NSC respond to your SR within 45 days. Hope this helps.
any more inputs??
any more inputs??
more...
house Brown and white horses
sangmami
06-16 07:24 AM
hey guys ,
can any1 tell me how long does it take to get EAD in hand from the date it was filed./and how long does it take to get the I 485 approved under present situation?.In our case the later we get i 485 the better it is for us.Thanks:D
can any1 tell me how long does it take to get EAD in hand from the date it was filed./and how long does it take to get the I 485 approved under present situation?.In our case the later we get i 485 the better it is for us.Thanks:D
tattoo Sport Girl Sania Mirza.
beautifulMind
11-03 08:30 PM
The CIR bill is definitely coming back. Obama has mentioned it few times that solving the current immigration problem is one of his highest priority. Now we will need to wait and see what changes they can add to the existent CIR bill to help legals. But I would think most of the bill should remain the same since they have wasted a lot of time and effort in coming up with it
more...
pictures wallpaper space art.
Anders �stberg
July 15th, 2004, 12:51 PM
Thanks for your kind comments!
Janet, you're right, they're about ready. They did fly around occasionally, sometimes grabbing the food out of the mouth of a parent in midair. Couldn't catch that on "film" unfortunately. :)
Picture taken with my 300/2.8, only mildly cropped, I was standing less than 5 meters away.
EXIF: ISO 400, f/7.1, 1/1250s.
As they were quite strongly backlit I used fill flash from 550EX + Better Beamer (first time I tried it), at -1 or possibly -2 (can't remember which)
Janet, you're right, they're about ready. They did fly around occasionally, sometimes grabbing the food out of the mouth of a parent in midair. Couldn't catch that on "film" unfortunately. :)
Picture taken with my 300/2.8, only mildly cropped, I was standing less than 5 meters away.
EXIF: ISO 400, f/7.1, 1/1250s.
As they were quite strongly backlit I used fill flash from 550EX + Better Beamer (first time I tried it), at -1 or possibly -2 (can't remember which)
dresses Creative Wallpapers Pics
pappu
07-21 10:16 AM
You can consult any lawyer. To the best of my knowledge you dont need employer sponsorship if ur a PhD although i could be wrong.
Yes. Just having a Ph.D does not ensure a greencard. Employer based EB greencards are straightforward in process since employer only has to prove that no american citizen is available to do the job and the employer is willing to pay the salary as per market rates. This is established via labor certification process. The other routes of bypassing this are by showing that one is so expectional that US Government should allow them to stay permanently in this country. The various routes for this are if you can show if you have several publications, articles, patents awards at international level. Extraordinary ability people in Sciences, sports and arts can apply for it. The other avenue is the investor category. if you invest money and give employment to US citizens. You should go through USCIS website to get more details on various GC routes.
Yes. Just having a Ph.D does not ensure a greencard. Employer based EB greencards are straightforward in process since employer only has to prove that no american citizen is available to do the job and the employer is willing to pay the salary as per market rates. This is established via labor certification process. The other routes of bypassing this are by showing that one is so expectional that US Government should allow them to stay permanently in this country. The various routes for this are if you can show if you have several publications, articles, patents awards at international level. Extraordinary ability people in Sciences, sports and arts can apply for it. The other avenue is the investor category. if you invest money and give employment to US citizens. You should go through USCIS website to get more details on various GC routes.
more...
makeup comment or fav,
saileshdude
07-16 10:30 AM
Guys,
I was laid off few weeks ago and my I-485 is pending for over 180 days. I have a potential offer from a company and I was planning to port my I-140 using AC21. My GC sponsoring employer had listed the position requiring Masters degree and my I-140 says EB2 as someone mentioned in the previous post.
The new offer that I am getting may not require Masters degree but it may require BS+6 years of experience. Will this be considered EB2 port ? I am not sure about this because this position requires BS +5 , which can also be considered as Eb2. As I am on timeline (my dates will be current as per Aug bulletin) I want to have job offer in hand so I cannot be picky about the position requirement at this time.
I was laid off few weeks ago and my I-485 is pending for over 180 days. I have a potential offer from a company and I was planning to port my I-140 using AC21. My GC sponsoring employer had listed the position requiring Masters degree and my I-140 says EB2 as someone mentioned in the previous post.
The new offer that I am getting may not require Masters degree but it may require BS+6 years of experience. Will this be considered EB2 port ? I am not sure about this because this position requires BS +5 , which can also be considered as Eb2. As I am on timeline (my dates will be current as per Aug bulletin) I want to have job offer in hand so I cannot be picky about the position requirement at this time.
girlfriend [Click image to get Large
Steve Mitchell
February 2nd, 2004, 11:22 PM
Here are the compatable lenses from the spec sheet:
Compatible Lenses
1) DX Nikkor : All functions supported
2) Type G or D AF Nikkor : All functions supported 3) Micro Nikkor 85 mm F2.8D : All functions supported except autofocus and some exposure modes 4) Other AF Nikkor*2 : All functions supported except 3D colour matrix metering, i-TTL balanced fill-fl ash for digital SLR
5) AI-P Nikkor : All functions supported except 3D colour matrix metering, i-TTL balanced fill-flash for digital SLR, and autofocus
6) Non-CPU : Can be used in exposure mode M, but exposure meter does not function; electronic range finder can be used if maximum aperture is f/5.6 or faster *1 IX Nikkor lenses can not be used; *2 Excluding lenses for F3AF
Not sure about the flash...maybe StevenT will see this and help you out. Also, not sure if you've seen the full official spec sheet, but here it is. Click here (http://www.dphoto.us/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=121).
Hi,
From an old time NIkon user with of all cameras the N70 (sort of ironic). I currently own a canon dig camera (s50) and I have found the need for a better optical zoom range, and stronger flash.
Almost bought the new canon rebel, but since I own some nikon equipment, and heard about d70, I held off.
So, the questions:;;
1) Will I be able to use my Nikon AF Nikkor 35-80mm lens?
2) How about my Sigma 70-300mm apo macro for nikon?
3) I also have sb26 nikon flash?
Are these all usable? WIll I be giving up functionality with these lenses or flash? Obviously, I'm more willing to spend 1k on the camera if I can utilize my current investment in my lenses and flash.
Thanks
Craig
Compatible Lenses
1) DX Nikkor : All functions supported
2) Type G or D AF Nikkor : All functions supported 3) Micro Nikkor 85 mm F2.8D : All functions supported except autofocus and some exposure modes 4) Other AF Nikkor*2 : All functions supported except 3D colour matrix metering, i-TTL balanced fill-fl ash for digital SLR
5) AI-P Nikkor : All functions supported except 3D colour matrix metering, i-TTL balanced fill-flash for digital SLR, and autofocus
6) Non-CPU : Can be used in exposure mode M, but exposure meter does not function; electronic range finder can be used if maximum aperture is f/5.6 or faster *1 IX Nikkor lenses can not be used; *2 Excluding lenses for F3AF
Not sure about the flash...maybe StevenT will see this and help you out. Also, not sure if you've seen the full official spec sheet, but here it is. Click here (http://www.dphoto.us/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=121).
Hi,
From an old time NIkon user with of all cameras the N70 (sort of ironic). I currently own a canon dig camera (s50) and I have found the need for a better optical zoom range, and stronger flash.
Almost bought the new canon rebel, but since I own some nikon equipment, and heard about d70, I held off.
So, the questions:;;
1) Will I be able to use my Nikon AF Nikkor 35-80mm lens?
2) How about my Sigma 70-300mm apo macro for nikon?
3) I also have sb26 nikon flash?
Are these all usable? WIll I be giving up functionality with these lenses or flash? Obviously, I'm more willing to spend 1k on the camera if I can utilize my current investment in my lenses and flash.
Thanks
Craig
hairstyles Autumn Desktop Wallpaper
dipu76
06-01 06:16 PM
It is illegal.
It will be great if someone can send me any reference to confirm that it is illegal..
It will be great if someone can send me any reference to confirm that it is illegal..
mrajatish
09-18 11:54 AM
Should clarify, meant post dec 2003
singhsa3
11-15 09:12 AM
Tri State Folks,
You just saw priority dates in Dec visa bulletin. What do you plan to do now?
I have some answers for you but would like to hear from you first..
You just saw priority dates in Dec visa bulletin. What do you plan to do now?
I have some answers for you but would like to hear from you first..
No comments:
Post a Comment