saileshdude
03-21 12:56 AM
Great!
With this info, your attorney can easily demonstrate that you were authorized to work for "Employer 2" at all times since last entry in the USA until date of filing for I-485.
There is nothing to worry about, IMHO.
Good Luck.
Thats what people need to understand that if u are doing AOS from H1 then you have to make sure that 1) Either you continue to use H1 with the proper employer or 2) If you decide to use EAD that you update the I-9 form properly with respective employers. You cannot involve into unauthorized work like say your h1 expired with current employer and you did not update your I-9 form to use EAD and say 4 months down the road you put in the new I-9 form with EAD info. Those 4 months of work would be considered unauthorized and yes it will impact your I-485.
With this info, your attorney can easily demonstrate that you were authorized to work for "Employer 2" at all times since last entry in the USA until date of filing for I-485.
There is nothing to worry about, IMHO.
Good Luck.
Thats what people need to understand that if u are doing AOS from H1 then you have to make sure that 1) Either you continue to use H1 with the proper employer or 2) If you decide to use EAD that you update the I-9 form properly with respective employers. You cannot involve into unauthorized work like say your h1 expired with current employer and you did not update your I-9 form to use EAD and say 4 months down the road you put in the new I-9 form with EAD info. Those 4 months of work would be considered unauthorized and yes it will impact your I-485.
wallpaper quotes on life and love
Ahimsa
11-08 03:12 PM
...Ahimsa, I hope you understand this is a platoonic conversation between us...
If you mean "platonic", yes ours is no doubt a friendly conversation.
I agree CIR will be modified but our EB reliefs (for existing EB applicants) are not controversial (ilegal immigration reliefs and H-1B increase are the most controversial), right?
I hope there would be some form of CIR with EB reliefs that both Dems and President would agree on.
Thanks
If you mean "platonic", yes ours is no doubt a friendly conversation.
I agree CIR will be modified but our EB reliefs (for existing EB applicants) are not controversial (ilegal immigration reliefs and H-1B increase are the most controversial), right?
I hope there would be some form of CIR with EB reliefs that both Dems and President would agree on.
Thanks
EB3Victim
07-18 12:10 PM
Hello,
I'm also in the same situation. My labor is approved May 2007. I'll need to apply for both 140 and 485 together. Can I do it at the same time ?? or do I need to file my 140 immediately and then 485 after a few days. Time is running out now, as we never know when USCIS would again stop accepting 485s. Please advice.
Thanks
Look at the below URL for the update from USCIS.485 can be filed until August 17
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
I'm also in the same situation. My labor is approved May 2007. I'll need to apply for both 140 and 485 together. Can I do it at the same time ?? or do I need to file my 140 immediately and then 485 after a few days. Time is running out now, as we never know when USCIS would again stop accepting 485s. Please advice.
Thanks
Look at the below URL for the update from USCIS.485 can be filed until August 17
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
2011 pics of quotes about life.
akred
06-15 01:23 AM
My birth certificate has my dad full name
<First> <Middle> <Last>
and mom's name as
<First> <Middle Initial> with no last name on it..
Is that an issue ?
Any ideas ?
Yes, that is an issue. You will need to get an affidavit. The affidavit can be faxed or scan+emailed over to you.
<First> <Middle> <Last>
and mom's name as
<First> <Middle Initial> with no last name on it..
Is that an issue ?
Any ideas ?
Yes, that is an issue. You will need to get an affidavit. The affidavit can be faxed or scan+emailed over to you.
more...
paskal
07-17 08:38 PM
I am EB-3 ROW PD 2007 Aug. Reading all the Eb-3 I people's angry, I started to wonder what's gonna happen to the EB-3 ROW. Seems like if lots of Eb3-I change to EB2-I , They will probably eat up all the Spillover from Eb1, EB2 ROW from now on. That makes EB-3 ROW and EB-3 I become the same boat.
Is it what gonna happened? and think about how many people can afford to spend an extra 10k to change the status from EB-3 to EB-2? That's totally not fair. We need to take action all EB-3 ers!!!!!!
danny,
i do not think its' quite that bad for EB3 ROW. the spillover system now in use is what USCIS was already doing till 2005. only in 2006 did the vertical spillover have any impact, since 2007 numbers were skewed by July. so things really have not changed that much for EB3 ROW. they will still get the large bulk of EB3 GC numbers, while retrogressed nations are limited to 7%.
also i do not think every future filing can be EB2. as it is USCIS a DOL appear to have tightened their scrutiny and narrowed their interpretation for both EB1 and EB2 approvals.
you are right of course that we must do something that helps everyone. recapture asap and then getting GC numbers increased (whether an absolute increase or exemptions) is the only solution.
Is it what gonna happened? and think about how many people can afford to spend an extra 10k to change the status from EB-3 to EB-2? That's totally not fair. We need to take action all EB-3 ers!!!!!!
danny,
i do not think its' quite that bad for EB3 ROW. the spillover system now in use is what USCIS was already doing till 2005. only in 2006 did the vertical spillover have any impact, since 2007 numbers were skewed by July. so things really have not changed that much for EB3 ROW. they will still get the large bulk of EB3 GC numbers, while retrogressed nations are limited to 7%.
also i do not think every future filing can be EB2. as it is USCIS a DOL appear to have tightened their scrutiny and narrowed their interpretation for both EB1 and EB2 approvals.
you are right of course that we must do something that helps everyone. recapture asap and then getting GC numbers increased (whether an absolute increase or exemptions) is the only solution.
cnag
05-23 09:16 PM
Contributed $100 today thru paypal.
Transaction ID: 4VB006771Y2661642
I have contributed several times in the past and was also a monthly subscriber of $20 until I closed my credit card account due to a fraudulent transaction. I had been in bench since the beginning of this year ( down but NOT OUT :) ). Fortunately was able to get a permanent job just last month. This means moving to a new place. Therefore I am not in a position to join the advocacy efforts at DC. Wish IV the very best and I am sure our efforts would not go in vain. I am an eternal optimist and so I am confident that our good days are round the corner.:D
PS. Admin please check your past records, and provide me donor access.
Transaction ID: 4VB006771Y2661642
I have contributed several times in the past and was also a monthly subscriber of $20 until I closed my credit card account due to a fraudulent transaction. I had been in bench since the beginning of this year ( down but NOT OUT :) ). Fortunately was able to get a permanent job just last month. This means moving to a new place. Therefore I am not in a position to join the advocacy efforts at DC. Wish IV the very best and I am sure our efforts would not go in vain. I am an eternal optimist and so I am confident that our good days are round the corner.:D
PS. Admin please check your past records, and provide me donor access.
more...
desi3933
03-05 12:19 PM
I think pre-adjudication solves this catch-22 situation, and they have been pre-adjudicating quite a bit over the past two years. So, I dont think that this is an issue.
>> I think pre-adjudication solves this catch-22 situation
No. It does not.
Since, as per letter, country of chargeability is assigned at the time of approval (i.e. when immigrant visa number is assigned)
.
>> I think pre-adjudication solves this catch-22 situation
No. It does not.
Since, as per letter, country of chargeability is assigned at the time of approval (i.e. when immigrant visa number is assigned)
.
2010 cute quotes on life and love.
Aah_GC
09-12 08:19 PM
Hi Prince,
I went thru posts on other forums with I 485 denials after 180 days of filing. In almost all the cases, people filed MTR and their I 485 was re-instated back to normal after that. You should be fine after filing the MTR with the help of attorney.
I know these 15-20 days will be hard for you. Hang on. I had the same experiance when there an RFE on my I 140.
That's right.. you will be fine. Just hang in there.
I went thru posts on other forums with I 485 denials after 180 days of filing. In almost all the cases, people filed MTR and their I 485 was re-instated back to normal after that. You should be fine after filing the MTR with the help of attorney.
I know these 15-20 days will be hard for you. Hang on. I had the same experiance when there an RFE on my I 140.
That's right.. you will be fine. Just hang in there.
more...
singhsa3
12-10 12:43 PM
I second this idea.
Why can't we move from a free service to a membership based and see how many people still continue ... evenif with 25K members it is only a handful who are active and part of the initiative ... so I would suggest to go for a membership ...
it could be a per month basis or pay a big amount and get membership for life or year ... say $200 for a year or $20 for a month ... we don't need the number/mass unless they are active in all way ... just my thoughts ... hope the IV core team will consider that ... enough of free rides ... now pay for it and get the access to forums ... :mad:
Why can't we move from a free service to a membership based and see how many people still continue ... evenif with 25K members it is only a handful who are active and part of the initiative ... so I would suggest to go for a membership ...
it could be a per month basis or pay a big amount and get membership for life or year ... say $200 for a year or $20 for a month ... we don't need the number/mass unless they are active in all way ... just my thoughts ... hope the IV core team will consider that ... enough of free rides ... now pay for it and get the access to forums ... :mad:
hair Life Quotes:
Dhundhun
06-29 02:59 AM
I and my wife got our approved EADs in our hand in 17 days (Mailing day to USCIS to recevied date by us). Only strange thing is that my EAD is valid from 06/2008 to 06/2009. I thought the new EADs validity would begin when the existing expires. My existing EAD expires on 09/19/2008. I lost 3 months with this renewal.
USCIS has been unfair in renewing EAD.
What about writing a letter to them? - by grace of God, if they do realize, they may give properly - for 2 years.
Nothing wrong in trying.
USCIS has been unfair in renewing EAD.
What about writing a letter to them? - by grace of God, if they do realize, they may give properly - for 2 years.
Nothing wrong in trying.
more...
amitjoey
05-27 03:59 PM
Thank you KRS, checklaw, navinms, TempWorker, vshar, rkg000, sanju_dba, vallabhu, vinodmp, metroparknj, satishbsk, kkt_tkk, akkotai, bikram_das_in, what_now, sweet23guyin, mantagon, WantGCQuick for your contributions today!!
$8250
$8250
hot life quotes orkut scraps
nixstor
03-20 06:41 PM
Mr. Gotcher posts this today.
Controversy over calculation of "fall across" visa numbers (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4610)
Long to short, Mr. Gotcher thinks the explanation of Apr. VB is an error.
I will just quote the last two paragraphs. If you are interested with this topic, you can follow the link to see detail.
************************************************
This is where the controversy arises. Do these provision require the Visa Office to let unused visa number from higher preference categories �fall down� into lower preference categories before being made available to single state quotas, or can they move unused numbers from a worldwide preference category over to single state quotas while there is still demand in the lower worldwide categories?
The Visa Office interpretation is that if there are unused numbers within a specific worldwide category, those numbers may be made available to single state quotas even if lower worldwide preference categories have visa cutoff dates because they are oversubscribed. I believe that this is an error.
The visa office's interpretation is correct and if you read 202 (a) (5) it clearly says that the country limits should be ignored for unused visa numbers.
Remember that these numbers are first categorized and then assigned to applicants on a per country basis. In other words, a visa number if it is EB2, should be assigned to EB2 (no matter what) before it goes to EB3. If it is EB1 visa number and for it to become a EB2 visa number, there should not be any need for that number in EB1 category.
One reasoning why this was difficult to see is because CIS has essentially wasted so many numbers that people are unable to tell where the movement is coming from.
I have gone through the sections of 202 (a) (5) and 203 (b) and the text of the law does not say that prefer country limits over categories. In 202 (a)
(5) it actually says assign visa numbers wasted in any category can be assigned with out per country limits. If you look at how they overflow from one category to another, those visa numbers belong to that category before they do NOT belong to a oversubscribed state or belong to ROW.
B T W Ron G is very selective in deciding who/what should (be) post(ed) on his forum. This is his third thought about how we ended up here.
Controversy over calculation of "fall across" visa numbers (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4610)
Long to short, Mr. Gotcher thinks the explanation of Apr. VB is an error.
I will just quote the last two paragraphs. If you are interested with this topic, you can follow the link to see detail.
************************************************
This is where the controversy arises. Do these provision require the Visa Office to let unused visa number from higher preference categories �fall down� into lower preference categories before being made available to single state quotas, or can they move unused numbers from a worldwide preference category over to single state quotas while there is still demand in the lower worldwide categories?
The Visa Office interpretation is that if there are unused numbers within a specific worldwide category, those numbers may be made available to single state quotas even if lower worldwide preference categories have visa cutoff dates because they are oversubscribed. I believe that this is an error.
The visa office's interpretation is correct and if you read 202 (a) (5) it clearly says that the country limits should be ignored for unused visa numbers.
Remember that these numbers are first categorized and then assigned to applicants on a per country basis. In other words, a visa number if it is EB2, should be assigned to EB2 (no matter what) before it goes to EB3. If it is EB1 visa number and for it to become a EB2 visa number, there should not be any need for that number in EB1 category.
One reasoning why this was difficult to see is because CIS has essentially wasted so many numbers that people are unable to tell where the movement is coming from.
I have gone through the sections of 202 (a) (5) and 203 (b) and the text of the law does not say that prefer country limits over categories. In 202 (a)
(5) it actually says assign visa numbers wasted in any category can be assigned with out per country limits. If you look at how they overflow from one category to another, those visa numbers belong to that category before they do NOT belong to a oversubscribed state or belong to ROW.
B T W Ron G is very selective in deciding who/what should (be) post(ed) on his forum. This is his third thought about how we ended up here.
more...
house wallpaper quotes about life.
Lasantha
09-17 04:40 PM
They do have per country limits. But the none of those countries have used up the 7% allocated for those individual states before the the total number of visas ran out. In other words none of those countries had applicants to consume the full 7% but collectively used up the the total number of visas.
But in the case of the countries like India, china etc they have actually used up the total 7% of the visas per country.
hang on.. but they are...as retroed as the rest of them...ROW and philpines are both AUG 02 for EB3.... ROW EB3 has been retroed for months and months.
that doesnt make any sence to me.?
so the ROW countries have no per county limits??? then why are they retroed??????
But in the case of the countries like India, china etc they have actually used up the total 7% of the visas per country.
hang on.. but they are...as retroed as the rest of them...ROW and philpines are both AUG 02 for EB3.... ROW EB3 has been retroed for months and months.
that doesnt make any sence to me.?
so the ROW countries have no per county limits??? then why are they retroed??????
tattoo funny life quotes and sayings.
Ramba
03-14 12:07 PM
People with EB3-India may not expect any kind of fast movement in near future, unless law changes. It will be in snail phase. It is waste discussion to analyze howmany people filled EB3 LC from India in 2002,2003 etc. Generally EB3 is very high demand catagory from all accross the world. EB3 contains skilled worker catagory including cooks, nurses, and so many many non-professional occupations. All the discusion are focussed on demand by Indian IT folks, by ignoring other spectrum of the demand by other group of peoples. Therfore no matter what; EB3-India will get only 3000 EB3 GC per year (Approxmatly 1500 primary).
1500 LC per year EB3 India is a tiny fraction of the demand by EB3 India. Therefore best advise in EB3 India folks to convert into EB2 to get use of early PD like 2002 or 2003.
1500 LC per year EB3 India is a tiny fraction of the demand by EB3 India. Therefore best advise in EB3 India folks to convert into EB2 to get use of early PD like 2002 or 2003.
more...
pictures Life quotes gives inspiration
gc4me
06-30 09:38 PM
My best guess is that when you created profile in USCIS.gov, probably by mistake you entered wrong receipt# which belongs to some one else. USCIS does not verify if the entered receipt # is belongs to you or not.
Earlier today I got an email from USCIS that said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On June 29, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Then by the evening my I-485 said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On June 30, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Problem My EB2 PD is not current, is this a system glitch or did I get GC?
Here are my stats
PD 2007/ India
Arrived on H4 Sept 1997
Change to F1 Jan 1999
Change to H1B Sept 2004
Applied extension Sept 2007
Applied for PERM June 2007
PERM Approved June 2007 EB-2 (approval in 4 days)
filed I-140, I-485 in the July madness
I-140 RFE March 2008
I-140 Approved May 2008
I-485 RFE May 2008
I-485 Approved June 30, 2008
Earlier today I got an email from USCIS that said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On June 29, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Then by the evening my I-485 said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On June 30, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Problem My EB2 PD is not current, is this a system glitch or did I get GC?
Here are my stats
PD 2007/ India
Arrived on H4 Sept 1997
Change to F1 Jan 1999
Change to H1B Sept 2004
Applied extension Sept 2007
Applied for PERM June 2007
PERM Approved June 2007 EB-2 (approval in 4 days)
filed I-140, I-485 in the July madness
I-140 RFE March 2008
I-140 Approved May 2008
I-485 RFE May 2008
I-485 Approved June 30, 2008
dresses Life Goes On. cute, quotes
nrk
06-10 03:43 PM
Seems like it is going to take one year to reach April 2006 for India i guess.
Looks like I will need to wait one more year :(
Congrats to folks with PD before Oct 2005. Hopefully you should be getting your GCs soon.
Looks like I will need to wait one more year :(
Congrats to folks with PD before Oct 2005. Hopefully you should be getting your GCs soon.
more...
makeup quotes on life. short quotes
s_r_e_e
08-05 08:20 PM
One more in same boat here .. EB3 India approval email received.. Dependent not approved , RFE for photos on EAD application .. EAD expires in one month ... lot of frustrations and trouble on my way I guess!!!!
girlfriend quotes on life. quotes on life
arihant
07-08 12:41 PM
Does an MBA from a foriegn University Qualify for an exemption of CAP of EB2 Visas?
I was thinking one has to MS in a US university to qualify.
Thanks for further clarifying.
There are two categories of people who will qualify for the exemption
1) Any person with any advanced degree from a US university. There fore the following would qualify as examples:
a) MS in Computer Science
b) PhD in Mechanical Engineering
c) MBA
d) MS in Physics
e) MS in English
2) Any person with an advanced degree in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) from a non-US university (i.e. minimum of 18 years of education: 12 years of school + 4 years of bachelors + 2 years of masters) + minimum 3 years of work experience in US in a "related" field. There fore the following would qualify as examples:
a) 4 year bachelors + 2 years of M. Tech in Chemical Engineering from China + 3 years as a chemical engineer in a company in US.
b) 3 year bachelors + 2 yeas of masters + PhD in mathematics from India + 3 years in mathematics related field in a company in US.
3) The following as examples would not qualify:
a) MBA from a non-US univ.
b) 3 years bachelors + 2 years masters from a non-US univ.
c) Masters in English from a non-US univ.
I was thinking one has to MS in a US university to qualify.
Thanks for further clarifying.
There are two categories of people who will qualify for the exemption
1) Any person with any advanced degree from a US university. There fore the following would qualify as examples:
a) MS in Computer Science
b) PhD in Mechanical Engineering
c) MBA
d) MS in Physics
e) MS in English
2) Any person with an advanced degree in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) from a non-US university (i.e. minimum of 18 years of education: 12 years of school + 4 years of bachelors + 2 years of masters) + minimum 3 years of work experience in US in a "related" field. There fore the following would qualify as examples:
a) 4 year bachelors + 2 years of M. Tech in Chemical Engineering from China + 3 years as a chemical engineer in a company in US.
b) 3 year bachelors + 2 yeas of masters + PhD in mathematics from India + 3 years in mathematics related field in a company in US.
3) The following as examples would not qualify:
a) MBA from a non-US univ.
b) 3 years bachelors + 2 years masters from a non-US univ.
c) Masters in English from a non-US univ.
hairstyles good quotes about life. quotes
grupak
06-27 10:30 AM
Call
amitjoey
05-31 04:38 PM
http://www.parlipro.org/table.htm
Purpose:
The Object of this motion is to enable the assembly, in order to attend to more urgent business, to lay aside the pending question in such a way that its consideration may be resumed at the will of the assembly as easily as if it were a new question, and in preference to new questions competing with it for consideration. It is to the interest of the assembly that this object should be attained instantly by a majority vote, and therefore this motion must either apply to, or take precedence of, every debatable motion whatever its rank.
The motion to Lay on the Table is undebatable, and requires only a majority vote, notwithstanding the fact that if not taken from the table the question is suppressed.
These are dangerous privileges which are given to no other motion whose adoption would result in final action on a main motion. There is a great temptation to make an improper use of them, and lay questions on the table for the purpose of instantly suppressing them by a majority vote, instead of using the previous question, the legitimate motion to bring the assembly to an immediate vote.
The fundamental principles of parliamentary law require a two-thirds vote for every motion that suppresses a main question for the session without free debate. The motion to lay on the table being undebatable, and requiring only a majority vote, and having the highest rank of all subsidiary motions, is in direct conflict with these principles, if used to suppress a question. If habitually used in this way, it should, like the other motions to suppress without debate, require a two-thirds vote. [Note: The current (Tenth) edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, does not permit this usage of Lay on the Table to suppress a question.]
As motions laid on the table are merely temporarily laid aside, the majority should remember that the minority may all stay to the moment of final adjournment and then be in the majority, and take up and pass the resolutions laid on the table. They may also take the question from the table at the next meeting in societies having regular meetings as frequently as quarterly. If not taken from the table at the next meeting, however, the motion dies.
Purpose:
The Object of this motion is to enable the assembly, in order to attend to more urgent business, to lay aside the pending question in such a way that its consideration may be resumed at the will of the assembly as easily as if it were a new question, and in preference to new questions competing with it for consideration. It is to the interest of the assembly that this object should be attained instantly by a majority vote, and therefore this motion must either apply to, or take precedence of, every debatable motion whatever its rank.
The motion to Lay on the Table is undebatable, and requires only a majority vote, notwithstanding the fact that if not taken from the table the question is suppressed.
These are dangerous privileges which are given to no other motion whose adoption would result in final action on a main motion. There is a great temptation to make an improper use of them, and lay questions on the table for the purpose of instantly suppressing them by a majority vote, instead of using the previous question, the legitimate motion to bring the assembly to an immediate vote.
The fundamental principles of parliamentary law require a two-thirds vote for every motion that suppresses a main question for the session without free debate. The motion to lay on the table being undebatable, and requiring only a majority vote, and having the highest rank of all subsidiary motions, is in direct conflict with these principles, if used to suppress a question. If habitually used in this way, it should, like the other motions to suppress without debate, require a two-thirds vote. [Note: The current (Tenth) edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, does not permit this usage of Lay on the Table to suppress a question.]
As motions laid on the table are merely temporarily laid aside, the majority should remember that the minority may all stay to the moment of final adjournment and then be in the majority, and take up and pass the resolutions laid on the table. They may also take the question from the table at the next meeting in societies having regular meetings as frequently as quarterly. If not taken from the table at the next meeting, however, the motion dies.
BharatPremi
03-13 05:07 PM
BharatPremi -- On what basis are you saying that? There are 1000s and 1000s of L1 VISA holder from India....there are at least 30,000 H1-B that come from India every year, most of them file under EB-3 category and then have wives and kids and they consume visa number.
I think EB-3 India will never move forward. I would love to know the reason behind what you just said about EB-3
It is a long story and has already been discussed here at great length. Whne you get a time click on my past postings and you will get the tons of info which relates to this claim.
I think EB-3 India will never move forward. I would love to know the reason behind what you just said about EB-3
It is a long story and has already been discussed here at great length. Whne you get a time click on my past postings and you will get the tons of info which relates to this claim.
No comments:
Post a Comment