pappu
08-15 11:54 AM
we can ask support from
http://www.usinpac.com/
let us register with USINPAC from here
http://www.usinpac.com/register.asp
another wikipedia which has lot of info on Indian Americans!!
check Politics section on this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American
another interesting item ..
Merrill Lynch recently revealed that there are nearly 200,000 Indian American millionaires. One in every nine Indians in the US is a millionaire, comprising 10% of US millionaires. (Source: 2003 Merrill Lynch SA Market Study).
IV is already working with USINPAC. if you know of any other indian orgs http://www.garamchai.com/desiassc.htm, pls contact them for support as an IV member.
http://www.usinpac.com/
let us register with USINPAC from here
http://www.usinpac.com/register.asp
another wikipedia which has lot of info on Indian Americans!!
check Politics section on this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American
another interesting item ..
Merrill Lynch recently revealed that there are nearly 200,000 Indian American millionaires. One in every nine Indians in the US is a millionaire, comprising 10% of US millionaires. (Source: 2003 Merrill Lynch SA Market Study).
IV is already working with USINPAC. if you know of any other indian orgs http://www.garamchai.com/desiassc.htm, pls contact them for support as an IV member.
thakkarbhav
09-15 12:49 PM
Congrats...Book the ticket and fly to india to give big hug to your wife and son and motherland...
ski_dude12
08-10 11:43 AM
Do you think USCIS cares who pays for it or where someone lives as long as the check goes through?
eastindia
09-27 12:43 PM
If you feel IV is our only hope/interpreter, then lets fuel it.
We all know IV needs funds to operate and to drive our concerns.
I propose $100K raffle every month, result will be announced on the VB day, if VB brings bad news atleast our raffle may get a good one! :D
each ticket may be sold for $10 ,
$10 x 20,000 tickets = 200k
100k for IV , 100k can be split to top 10 winners.
Please take your poll above.
Experts can add suggestions to help it construct.
Ideas are like a**holes. Everybody as got one. :D
We all know IV needs funds to operate and to drive our concerns.
I propose $100K raffle every month, result will be announced on the VB day, if VB brings bad news atleast our raffle may get a good one! :D
each ticket may be sold for $10 ,
$10 x 20,000 tickets = 200k
100k for IV , 100k can be split to top 10 winners.
Please take your poll above.
Experts can add suggestions to help it construct.
Ideas are like a**holes. Everybody as got one. :D
more...
mirage
07-29 02:25 PM
I did not have prior information about this call, else I would,ve ask them 2 questions.
1) Why Don't USCIS give 2 years AP too..
2) USCIS should publish some statistics on how many Employement based AOS applications they have pending, what EB categories they are in along the the chargeable country and priority dates..
Thanks
1) Why Don't USCIS give 2 years AP too..
2) USCIS should publish some statistics on how many Employement based AOS applications they have pending, what EB categories they are in along the the chargeable country and priority dates..
Thanks
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
05-20 10:46 AM
I have completed. :)
Thanks for the link...Btw are you taking the same class...:)
Thanks for the link...Btw are you taking the same class...:)
more...
unseenguy
02-23 01:34 PM
Why people ask dumb questions. For me most of these questions are dumb and answers are obvious.
shut up idiot. Do you know how many 485s have been rejected for using AC21? Some people have advised me to stay where I am as long as it takes, but my gut tells me to find another job. So I am just asking for risk and opinions.
shut up idiot. Do you know how many 485s have been rejected for using AC21? Some people have advised me to stay where I am as long as it takes, but my gut tells me to find another job. So I am just asking for risk and opinions.
jnraajan
03-27 11:56 AM
I am celebrating the good news from IV by pledging $100 to IV. Any one care to up the ante on this?
My Receipt ID: 54118296K6578915K
My Receipt ID: 54118296K6578915K
more...
PD_Dec2002
07-07 10:21 PM
are you talking about filing LC for ad sent out already that I said ? or ...
Showing 1 year of work experience when you don't really have that experience. You can be asked for pay stubs, employer verification letters, etc. for I-140 and maybe even for I-485. For all you know, you might have a smooth ride all the way to your GC. But as I wrote earlier, there's no guarantee when your past can come back to haunt you.
Thanks,
Jayant
Showing 1 year of work experience when you don't really have that experience. You can be asked for pay stubs, employer verification letters, etc. for I-140 and maybe even for I-485. For all you know, you might have a smooth ride all the way to your GC. But as I wrote earlier, there's no guarantee when your past can come back to haunt you.
Thanks,
Jayant
krustycat
09-28 10:32 PM
My 485/EAD applications were mailed on July 5th. and received on July 9th. by F HEINAUER at NSC.
I have not received a single notice and checks were not cashed.
I called customer service today and the they told me to wait 90 days.... :eek:business days!!!
I have not received a single notice and checks were not cashed.
I called customer service today and the they told me to wait 90 days.... :eek:business days!!!
more...
delax
08-05 11:36 AM
I've applied for EAD/AP renewal for both myself and my wife. I spent $1,290 for this.
Say I got my GC approved and then I call USCIS and withdraw my pending EAD/AP application. Will I get a refund for pending EAD/AP application, if I get my GC approved before EAD/AP approval?
Thanks,
India EB2; PD - Nov 05
I-140 - Filed Mar '06; Approved Jun '06
I-485 - Reached NSC July 26'07;
While you raise a valid point, I would rather consider that as a donation to USCIS for them to fix their screwed up systems so that they truly follow FIFO and benefit people ready to enter the GC maze down the line.......
Say I got my GC approved and then I call USCIS and withdraw my pending EAD/AP application. Will I get a refund for pending EAD/AP application, if I get my GC approved before EAD/AP approval?
Thanks,
India EB2; PD - Nov 05
I-140 - Filed Mar '06; Approved Jun '06
I-485 - Reached NSC July 26'07;
While you raise a valid point, I would rather consider that as a donation to USCIS for them to fix their screwed up systems so that they truly follow FIFO and benefit people ready to enter the GC maze down the line.......
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America?s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering ? the ?best and brightest? from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America?s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born ? until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap ? currently at 65,000 ? on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China?s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company ? like every other business ? will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game ? and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities ? much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (?11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent ?national need?. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering ? the ?best and brightest? from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America?s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born ? until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap ? currently at 65,000 ? on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China?s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company ? like every other business ? will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game ? and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities ? much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (?11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent ?national need?. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
more...
purgan
01-14 04:41 PM
Now, that's a good idea. How about Cutting Permanent Residency Delays.
18 months is too long for citizenship applicants, and 6 years not too long for permanent residency applicants.
===
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/us/12citizen.html
Agency Acts to Cut Delay in Gaining Citizenship
By JULIA PRESTON
Published: January 12, 2008
Federal officials said Friday that they had agreed on an emergency plan to hire back about 700 retired government employees in an effort to pare an immense backlog in applications for citizenship by legal immigrants.
Under the plan, first proposed by Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, retired workers could return to the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency without sacrificing any part of their pensions. The agency will be authorized to hire former employees who have long since passed training programs and could be on the job quickly to help handle the more than one million citizenship applications filed in the first 10 months of last year, Mr. Schumer said.
The required waiver was approved in a letter on Thursday to immigration officials from Linda M. Springer, the director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The rehiring program is one step to help the immigration agency overcome an embarrassing backlog. Legal immigrants, saying they were spurred by a fee increase that took effect July 30 and by worries raised in the fierce political debate over immigration, applied in huge numbers last summer to become citizens. They were aided by a nationwide drive led by Hispanic groups and Univision, the Spanish-language television network.
According to its Web site, the immigration agency is projecting that it could take up to 18 months to process citizenship applications received after June 1. Hispanic groups have protested that hundreds of thousands of applicants would be unable to vote in the presidential election.
?It?s a problem of their own making,? William Ramos, director of the Washington office of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund, said of the agency. ?We kept telling them, there is going to be a surge.?
In recent days, the immigration agency confirmed that it received 1,026,951 citizenship applications from last January to October, nearly double the number in that period in 2006.
The agency also received a deluge of other immigration petitions.
Hispanic groups have demanded that the agency complete by July 4 the naturalizations of all immigrants who applied in the 2007 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, Mr. Ramos said.
Normally, when retired federal employers return to work, their salaries are reduced by the amount of their pension payments. Under the new waiver, retired workers who return to the immigration agency will receive full salary as well as their regular pension payments.
Christopher Bentley, a spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Services, said the agency was also reorganizing its work force and imposing mandatory overtime on current workers.
The immigration agency plans to hire at least 1,500 new regular employees by the end of this year, Mr. Bentley said.
18 months is too long for citizenship applicants, and 6 years not too long for permanent residency applicants.
===
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/us/12citizen.html
Agency Acts to Cut Delay in Gaining Citizenship
By JULIA PRESTON
Published: January 12, 2008
Federal officials said Friday that they had agreed on an emergency plan to hire back about 700 retired government employees in an effort to pare an immense backlog in applications for citizenship by legal immigrants.
Under the plan, first proposed by Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, retired workers could return to the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency without sacrificing any part of their pensions. The agency will be authorized to hire former employees who have long since passed training programs and could be on the job quickly to help handle the more than one million citizenship applications filed in the first 10 months of last year, Mr. Schumer said.
The required waiver was approved in a letter on Thursday to immigration officials from Linda M. Springer, the director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The rehiring program is one step to help the immigration agency overcome an embarrassing backlog. Legal immigrants, saying they were spurred by a fee increase that took effect July 30 and by worries raised in the fierce political debate over immigration, applied in huge numbers last summer to become citizens. They were aided by a nationwide drive led by Hispanic groups and Univision, the Spanish-language television network.
According to its Web site, the immigration agency is projecting that it could take up to 18 months to process citizenship applications received after June 1. Hispanic groups have protested that hundreds of thousands of applicants would be unable to vote in the presidential election.
?It?s a problem of their own making,? William Ramos, director of the Washington office of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund, said of the agency. ?We kept telling them, there is going to be a surge.?
In recent days, the immigration agency confirmed that it received 1,026,951 citizenship applications from last January to October, nearly double the number in that period in 2006.
The agency also received a deluge of other immigration petitions.
Hispanic groups have demanded that the agency complete by July 4 the naturalizations of all immigrants who applied in the 2007 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, Mr. Ramos said.
Normally, when retired federal employers return to work, their salaries are reduced by the amount of their pension payments. Under the new waiver, retired workers who return to the immigration agency will receive full salary as well as their regular pension payments.
Christopher Bentley, a spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Services, said the agency was also reorganizing its work force and imposing mandatory overtime on current workers.
The immigration agency plans to hire at least 1,500 new regular employees by the end of this year, Mr. Bentley said.
ThinkTwice
07-11 05:59 PM
the bay area.
- SFSU
- SJSU
Please post this info for ALL international students.
- SFSU
- SJSU
Please post this info for ALL international students.
more...
koppula09
01-04 12:51 PM
Hi,
I have a serious problem and I am not sure what would be the solution. My wife came on H4 in 2001 and we applied for H1B and we got an approval which was valid until Oct 2006. But, in Mar 2006, due to some personal reasons we applied for COS from H1B to H4 and we got H4 approval which was valid until Aug 27, 2006. Before the expiry of H4 status in August 2006, we decided to apply for H1B and since her H1B was valid until Oct 2006, our attorney applied for H1B under I-539 and they didn't apply for H4 extension simultaneously. Meanwhile, while the H1B was in process, we applied for premium processing later which added few problems. We got an RFE on this case and our attorney answered it by sending appropriate docs but again we got a second RFE which is not answered yet.
Right now she is out of status and also, what will happen if her H1 is rejected and is it possible to apply for H4 right now, since it was expired in Aug 2006. If her H1 is rejected, can we apply for H4 even though her H4 was expired few months back or she has leave the country. Please help us out.
Thanks & Regards,
-- Venkat
I have a serious problem and I am not sure what would be the solution. My wife came on H4 in 2001 and we applied for H1B and we got an approval which was valid until Oct 2006. But, in Mar 2006, due to some personal reasons we applied for COS from H1B to H4 and we got H4 approval which was valid until Aug 27, 2006. Before the expiry of H4 status in August 2006, we decided to apply for H1B and since her H1B was valid until Oct 2006, our attorney applied for H1B under I-539 and they didn't apply for H4 extension simultaneously. Meanwhile, while the H1B was in process, we applied for premium processing later which added few problems. We got an RFE on this case and our attorney answered it by sending appropriate docs but again we got a second RFE which is not answered yet.
Right now she is out of status and also, what will happen if her H1 is rejected and is it possible to apply for H4 right now, since it was expired in Aug 2006. If her H1 is rejected, can we apply for H4 even though her H4 was expired few months back or she has leave the country. Please help us out.
Thanks & Regards,
-- Venkat
bigboy007
04-17 09:31 AM
In case of NOC codes you can only try to make sure you have same / similar duties , In case of parent labor you can see your Job code but not the new one. This is what i think , try to make justification on Job duties ...
Check the directory of occupational titles and ensure the new and old jobs have the same / very close occupational code. You can find it on the DOL website. Duties is one thing, but the code is also important.
Check the directory of occupational titles and ensure the new and old jobs have the same / very close occupational code. You can find it on the DOL website. Duties is one thing, but the code is also important.
more...
ChainReaction
04-02 04:09 PM
If an RFE has been issues, it will show up on the USCIS case status website when you type in your receipt number.
Thanks a_yaja for UR reply :)
Thanks a_yaja for UR reply :)
Alabaman
04-05 03:57 PM
Nice Article... hits the nail on the head!! I wish it also highlighted the need for high skilled immigrants to be able to get GCs easily too.
gimme Green!!
06-14 04:54 PM
On what basis does I-485 get processed?
Is it based on Labor application (Priority Date) or by date of receipt of I-485 application? :confused:
Or by luck of the draw?:cool:
Is it based on Labor application (Priority Date) or by date of receipt of I-485 application? :confused:
Or by luck of the draw?:cool:
chanduv23
09-10 09:51 AM
I ordered the Golf Tee - United colors of IV just now with the 1 to 5 business day shipping option, the second option. As I am planning to drive down Monday evening - I am hopeful that I will get it by then.
I would still recommend that we bring a lot of shirts of various sizes to the rally. People will definitely buy them there.
I would still recommend that we bring a lot of shirts of various sizes to the rally. People will definitely buy them there.
tabletpc
08-24 03:08 PM
Is it true that if we apply for candadian PR we can't apply for visitors visa to cananda.
I want to apply for PR to canada and also would like to go for stamping to cananda sometime after 4-5 months.
Thanks in advance...
I want to apply for PR to canada and also would like to go for stamping to cananda sometime after 4-5 months.
Thanks in advance...
0 comments:
Post a Comment