black_logs
04-25 01:14 PM
Guys let me clearify it. We cannot change our agenda at this point . It is not an option. We have done 1000's of hr discussions with QGA and so many meetings with various Senators and Congressmen to get our agenda finalized. Adding something new to our agenda is not an option. But this is a very healthy discussion going on here. Pleople can send personal comments and ideas to the lawmakers. This is surely a very good suggestion.
. I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator�s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want� include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date. WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let�s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
. I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator�s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want� include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date. WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let�s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
wallpaper fast five wallpaper.
manderson
03-04 10:09 AM
There is an I-131 LUD today from NSC and it says document mailed and that it will be delivered within 30 days.
My RD is 8/15, ND is 10/12. I guess the Processing Times (@ 9/30 as of Feb 15, 08) caught up.
Hang in there guys.
My RD is 8/15, ND is 10/12. I guess the Processing Times (@ 9/30 as of Feb 15, 08) caught up.
Hang in there guys.
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 11:06 AM
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Guys,
This is one of the most serious issue we are facing in current time. Lay offs are happening left and right and on top of that employers learned that AC21 is giving troubles, they started squeezing more (I myself is partially victim of that).
We need sincere efforts sending emails to ombudsman. This will not take more than 5 minutes as NK2006 put efforts on even giving you the email template.
I sincerely urge everyone to send emails to addresses NK2006 mentioned above and even request your collegues, spouse to do so. We need volume to show our presence.
One more request, please take one more minute and make sure that you post here that you sent emails. This will give us real picture and give others motivation too!
I sent my emails (actually twice ;)).
2011 in Fast Five Wallpaper
ilikekilo
10-24 03:15 PM
jsut follweod up with my lawyer and Iwas told that my old company doesnot usaully revoke 140's unless the person left the company b4 the setforth dates as part of GC agreement (4yrs or b4 getting gc ) or the person discharged for some other reason...
HOWEVER i am still not taking chances and am participating int his campn. and alreay sent email as requested..tx guys
HOWEVER i am still not taking chances and am participating int his campn. and alreay sent email as requested..tx guys
more...
Leo07
05-03 02:28 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
GeetaRam
12-01 09:33 AM
Thanks a lot for your reply 9 years...
more...
chanduv23
09-17 10:27 AM
Come on folks - we are doing everything we can till we start to DC
Milind - kudos for this effort
Come on folks - IV is doing so much for you - IV has provided you with sucha wonderful platform
Lets all payback by doing what we can
Milind - kudos for this effort
Come on folks - IV is doing so much for you - IV has provided you with sucha wonderful platform
Lets all payback by doing what we can
2010 Download Fast Five Wallpaper;
Jimi_Hendrix
12-14 02:55 PM
Time: 7 PM PST
Conference Dial-In: (712) 432-3000
Conference Bridge: 227974
Conference Dial-In: (712) 432-3000
Conference Bridge: 227974
more...
immig4me
05-04 08:57 AM
This campaign starts at 4:00 PM EST on 29th April, 2010 and will run until the end of next week. We request all IV members to call the Senate offices listed below between 9:00 AM EST and 5:00 PM EST.
So, this Campaign runs for another 3 days, IV members need to pick up the phones and start calling. Remember, if no bill is put forth before the end of May, it will be legislatively impossible to take CIR this year.
It all boils down to, how much are we willing to help our own cause.
So, this Campaign runs for another 3 days, IV members need to pick up the phones and start calling. Remember, if no bill is put forth before the end of May, it will be legislatively impossible to take CIR this year.
It all boils down to, how much are we willing to help our own cause.
hair house fast five wallpaper hd.
waiting_gc
09-11 09:35 PM
Just made a one time contribution of $100. Will contribute more in future.
Order Details - Sep 11, 2007 7:48 PM MDT
Google Order #636782625897168
I would love to attend the rally, but will not be able to do so due to family situation.
Order Details - Sep 11, 2007 7:48 PM MDT
Google Order #636782625897168
I would love to attend the rally, but will not be able to do so due to family situation.
more...
bpratap
05-15 05:24 PM
The bank is GMAC.
this is a bank owned property, and there is a pre-condition that we should use their bank for the loan.
Wondering how to explain the VISA situation in a way they would understand.
this is a bank owned property, and there is a pre-condition that we should use their bank for the loan.
Wondering how to explain the VISA situation in a way they would understand.
hot Bikini Girls HD Wallpapers
PD_Dec2002
06-02 08:35 PM
My interpretation of:
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the and [I]were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
IMHO, the terms "pending" and "approved" are applicable only to I-140's filed before the date of introduction [May 15th 2007]. This is because there is no comma between the two terms "pending, or approved". This leads to only two scenarios:
1. I-140 applied before May 15th 2007, but is still pending as of the effective date [which could be Oct 1st 2008].
2. I-140 applied before May 15th 2007, and is approved as of the effective date [which could be Oct 1st 2008].
Only the two scenarios above are eligible to continue/file under the old system.
Thanks,
Jayant
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the and [I]were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
IMHO, the terms "pending" and "approved" are applicable only to I-140's filed before the date of introduction [May 15th 2007]. This is because there is no comma between the two terms "pending, or approved". This leads to only two scenarios:
1. I-140 applied before May 15th 2007, but is still pending as of the effective date [which could be Oct 1st 2008].
2. I-140 applied before May 15th 2007, and is approved as of the effective date [which could be Oct 1st 2008].
Only the two scenarios above are eligible to continue/file under the old system.
Thanks,
Jayant
more...
house the fast five wallpaper.
softcrowd
01-06 10:56 PM
How come observations made over years on 100's to 1000's of students are "unsubstantiated"? Of course you may want not to believe me; that is your prerogative, and so is writing my own experience mine.
raysaikat - You must be kidding by trying to prove that you have taught 1000s of Anna/Osmania University students & number of them are bad as you described. You started in 100s & are now talking about thousands and I am sure if this argument continues you would go to even higher numbers just for the heck of proving your point. After all, its a matter of pressing few keys on your keyboard....but what credibility does it has when there is no way to validate??
May be, as "NKR" pointed out, you have some bad impression about the Univs in certain region of India - looking at the list you provided!! Otherwise - Anna university is considered to be a top rated institute in south india esp., TN state. Osmania is also a very decent one (esp in Engg/comp sc). Both these universities are very famous for their ability to attract a lot of recruiters (All top indian companies + many MNCs as well). And here on this board, you just rule those out with a single word - Crappy!!
Don't just generalize things as you want based on the data that comes to your mind. By doing so, you are not only slinging mud at some decent univs but are also hurting a lot of people!!
raysaikat - You must be kidding by trying to prove that you have taught 1000s of Anna/Osmania University students & number of them are bad as you described. You started in 100s & are now talking about thousands and I am sure if this argument continues you would go to even higher numbers just for the heck of proving your point. After all, its a matter of pressing few keys on your keyboard....but what credibility does it has when there is no way to validate??
May be, as "NKR" pointed out, you have some bad impression about the Univs in certain region of India - looking at the list you provided!! Otherwise - Anna university is considered to be a top rated institute in south india esp., TN state. Osmania is also a very decent one (esp in Engg/comp sc). Both these universities are very famous for their ability to attract a lot of recruiters (All top indian companies + many MNCs as well). And here on this board, you just rule those out with a single word - Crappy!!
Don't just generalize things as you want based on the data that comes to your mind. By doing so, you are not only slinging mud at some decent univs but are also hurting a lot of people!!
tattoo the fast five wallpaper.
black_logs
03-09 11:29 AM
So they'll probably take out schedule A workers(Nurses etc.) from EB3 category
more...
pictures fast five wallpaper. fast five
satyasaich
03-08 01:10 PM
Could be a firewall if you are in a corporate office that impose some rules
Otherwise i think all should be able to listen
Update: There are only 6 members of committee, but Sen.Spector decided to start the debate
Why is that some people are getting access and some people are note getting access to the judiciary committee hearing on immigration
Otherwise i think all should be able to listen
Update: There are only 6 members of committee, but Sen.Spector decided to start the debate
Why is that some people are getting access and some people are note getting access to the judiciary committee hearing on immigration
dresses Home gt; Movie gt; Fast Five gt;
ashutrip
06-18 11:03 AM
Hope not, we never thought that this will be current so soon. so my gut feeling is that we all should be fine up until Sep end.
Good luck for you and all!
I am praying what u say is right!1111
Good luck for you and all!
I am praying what u say is right!1111
more...
makeup fast five wallpaper hd. wallpapers HD Fast Five,; the
ilwaiting
04-25 11:37 AM
H1B believe it or not is a "dual intent visa". F1 is NOT a dual intent visa. So what that means is even tho a person entered USA on H1B(which is Nonimmigrant visa) he can have a dual intent to "adjust status" and become a permanent resident.
So I would think it would very wise to be given a PD based on when a person started working on "H"
Coming in through H1 does'nt show your intention of becoming a permanent resident of this country. It only happens when the LC is applied. Although the entry date is an ingenious way, it will only create more issues. Now some one who comes in F1 can also ask for the same benefit when they move to H1, to take their entry date in F1 as their priority date. I believe the culprits are the labor substitution and the labor certification sales. Those are unfair. Stop labor substitutions, and if they need one, then use the 140 RD as the PD. That should solve most of the problems and people from using labor sub to jump the line.
So I would think it would very wise to be given a PD based on when a person started working on "H"
Coming in through H1 does'nt show your intention of becoming a permanent resident of this country. It only happens when the LC is applied. Although the entry date is an ingenious way, it will only create more issues. Now some one who comes in F1 can also ask for the same benefit when they move to H1, to take their entry date in F1 as their priority date. I believe the culprits are the labor substitution and the labor certification sales. Those are unfair. Stop labor substitutions, and if they need one, then use the 140 RD as the PD. That should solve most of the problems and people from using labor sub to jump the line.
girlfriend dresses fast five wallpaper.
Radhika
07-19 10:33 AM
upgraded $20 to $50 monthly
hairstyles fast five wallpaper hd. fast
makemygc
07-06 01:01 PM
My lawyer told me that they are working on something to accept all applications which reached on july ... lets hope he is right.
Dude enough of your and your lawyer's crap. I just checked your last post. This is what you claim your lawyer said and this was posted couple of days back.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I called my lawyer he said the are accepting applications which reached there before 12:15. does anybody have news like that or he just lying....
Dude enough of your and your lawyer's crap. I just checked your last post. This is what you claim your lawyer said and this was posted couple of days back.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I called my lawyer he said the are accepting applications which reached there before 12:15. does anybody have news like that or he just lying....
bpratap
04-25 11:41 AM
its generally the case, where these loan officers doesn't understand the Immigration process.
I also had to go thru it. I would suggest to give them a copy of I-140 approval. that is an approved doc, than a pending I-485.
Good part is, the Underwriters generally know about the immigration process and would take 1-140 approval doc as a valid doc.
Dont worry, your loan will be approved.
I also had to go thru it. I would suggest to give them a copy of I-140 approval. that is an approved doc, than a pending I-485.
Good part is, the Underwriters generally know about the immigration process and would take 1-140 approval doc as a valid doc.
Dont worry, your loan will be approved.
pcs
07-05 10:57 AM
We need to have sticky & web fax on this issue
No comments:
Post a Comment