sriramkalyan
09-15 04:05 PM
Last time CIR had sweet deal for Illegals ..
Pay $100 and get Z visa ( Work Permit ) .. --> GC --> Citizenship ---> Vote for ?? ..
For Legals ...go back and restart in new queue .. We dont want to skilled people be free of our companies. We expect you to be enslaved ..We are leader of Free world.
Pay $100 and get Z visa ( Work Permit ) .. --> GC --> Citizenship ---> Vote for ?? ..
For Legals ...go back and restart in new queue .. We dont want to skilled people be free of our companies. We expect you to be enslaved ..We are leader of Free world.
wallpaper Top+10+dog+reeds+in+india
morchu
04-21 02:45 PM
Try to be "truthful" in the "intent".
You are NOT loosing "anything" by filing a second LC at the new location. You keep your priority date, and PERM is fast and I-140 processing time is 4 months or so.
If they see a chance of "fraud" intention, USCIS may call you for interview and if they were able to interpret your intentions as fraud, it is going to be really costly.
Also you need full support from your employer, and might need to show that the offered "permanent position as mentioned in LC" exists at the time of 485 filing.
-Morchu
[QUOTE=fromnaija;335920]Yes, if you are sure of moving back to the job location specified in the Labor Certification you may not have to restart the process. If you know you will not move back, youand your employer will be commiting immigration fraud if a new LC is not applied.
what kind of evidence you need to provide to show the intention that you will move back to the original location!
You are NOT loosing "anything" by filing a second LC at the new location. You keep your priority date, and PERM is fast and I-140 processing time is 4 months or so.
If they see a chance of "fraud" intention, USCIS may call you for interview and if they were able to interpret your intentions as fraud, it is going to be really costly.
Also you need full support from your employer, and might need to show that the offered "permanent position as mentioned in LC" exists at the time of 485 filing.
-Morchu
[QUOTE=fromnaija;335920]Yes, if you are sure of moving back to the job location specified in the Labor Certification you may not have to restart the process. If you know you will not move back, youand your employer will be commiting immigration fraud if a new LC is not applied.
what kind of evidence you need to provide to show the intention that you will move back to the original location!
wandmaker
10-23 01:05 PM
Hi,
My mother-in-law is coming to US on 2nd Dec on a one-way ticket, she will be going back around March 09 i.e. in almost 4 months.
As we dont know abt the dates as such of return so we have booked a one-way ticket from India to US.
Will there be any problem due to that at port of entry?
Do she also need to carry travel insurance along with her?
Thanks in advance.
Buy a two way ticket with future date and adjust the later according to her comfort. With one-way ticket, your in-law will have a problem in convincing a POE officer that she will return. Do the math!
My mother-in-law is coming to US on 2nd Dec on a one-way ticket, she will be going back around March 09 i.e. in almost 4 months.
As we dont know abt the dates as such of return so we have booked a one-way ticket from India to US.
Will there be any problem due to that at port of entry?
Do she also need to carry travel insurance along with her?
Thanks in advance.
Buy a two way ticket with future date and adjust the later according to her comfort. With one-way ticket, your in-law will have a problem in convincing a POE officer that she will return. Do the math!
2011 Oldest dog breeds, and mar
Munna Bhai
12-14 10:16 AM
Well you can always get the Equivalence Certificate from know Evaluator. USCIS also uses few Evaluators� for various purposes. You should find one of those and get the Evaluation done by them. 3 year Indian degree is VERY MUCH equal to a 4 years BS degree in the US. It's very interesting they way these evaluators do it.
It is true that you can use evaluators but things may get tough very soon, hence my request to everyone is "be prepared" and do let us know.
It is true that you can use evaluators but things may get tough very soon, hence my request to everyone is "be prepared" and do let us know.
more...
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
acsouza
03-20 07:15 PM
Yes I believe the HR department is wrong in this case.
The problem according to them is that they need to verify the picture on the document I provide with the picture that the E-verify system will show.
I am researching this further once I get some more information from DHS I will be arguing with HR again.
Thanks Euclid.
The problem according to them is that they need to verify the picture on the document I provide with the picture that the E-verify system will show.
I am researching this further once I get some more information from DHS I will be arguing with HR again.
Thanks Euclid.
more...
espoir
07-09 03:59 PM
Nice. Hope this video makes it to the youtube debate.
2010 small dog breeds that don.
whiteStallion
11-10 02:44 PM
For my recent in-laws trip, I took insurance from ICICI Lombard. As one of the previous poster mentioned they are tied up with United Healthcare and they give you an Identity Card from United Healthcare. I previously used United and they are pretty good. So its a reliable Insurance.
I took the platinum cover for my in-laws(age:mid 50s) and it came to around INR 16k for both of them for a 3 months stay, which I consider is reasonable, given a $ 250K coverage.
Previously when my parents came, I have taken ICICI Lombard. Though I was lucky enough that they did not have any medical issues and I did not need to show up at any doctor/hospital.
I took the platinum cover for my in-laws(age:mid 50s) and it came to around INR 16k for both of them for a 3 months stay, which I consider is reasonable, given a $ 250K coverage.
Previously when my parents came, I have taken ICICI Lombard. Though I was lucky enough that they did not have any medical issues and I did not need to show up at any doctor/hospital.
more...
WillIBLucky
11-17 01:56 PM
That brings up a good point, why do you think all the PDs are moving except India?
Is there really that many applicants from India than China
The problem is even CIS layed off many people since 2004 and now are left with few people to work on. The left out people are not "like Indians in USA" kind of people.
And further more they cannot offshore processing to India as well. So what do they do......hmm lets retrogress Indians. Its working for them.
Is there really that many applicants from India than China
The problem is even CIS layed off many people since 2004 and now are left with few people to work on. The left out people are not "like Indians in USA" kind of people.
And further more they cannot offshore processing to India as well. So what do they do......hmm lets retrogress Indians. Its working for them.
hair dog breeds chart,
viswanadh73
01-07 11:19 AM
can Employer with draw Approved I-140 if they want after 180 days of pending 485 if any body changes his/her job with out notifying USCIS(AC21).
thanks for your replies.
thanks for your replies.
more...
Raj2006
06-04 10:04 AM
to Phoenix lockbox 4/12. It was sent to CSC. I got my card approved 5/26. Got Card on 6/3.
My wife case though still pending at CSC.:confused:
did you get a finger print notice? as far as I know they wont send FP notice for paper filing..but just want to confirm.
My wife case though still pending at CSC.:confused:
did you get a finger print notice? as far as I know they wont send FP notice for paper filing..but just want to confirm.
hot akc dog breeds
satishku_2000
06-15 11:10 PM
Thanks for the reply.
But i filed GC 6 times i had three approved I 140's with different priority dates.
I missed filing my 485 couple times.
thanks,
I asked because how much sanity would have left in a person if someone is in the game since 2001 ...:D :D :D :D
Good luck
But i filed GC 6 times i had three approved I 140's with different priority dates.
I missed filing my 485 couple times.
thanks,
I asked because how much sanity would have left in a person if someone is in the game since 2001 ...:D :D :D :D
Good luck
more...
house NYC Most Popular Dog Breeds in
GCwaitforever
02-27 04:21 PM
Leslie,
Check this out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_visa
Check this out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_visa
tattoo This chart has done the rounds
texcan
01-06 04:33 PM
The officer retains one of the original AP the first time. The other one that is handed over to you is stamped. So next time, you show the one that is stamped to enter and you will not have to give them any more copies.
Now my experience may be different, but i believe there are some differences in the process.
My AP Experience:
No secondary check, i told officer that we are using AP. He said fine,
took both copies , stamped with AOS stamp and gave back both copies.
I donot think he made a copy for himself or even kept one original.
I was worried about re-entry as my wife had status change and had not gone back home after status change; and then this 485 filing.
But overall it was very sweet.
I must say there were few others going thru AP process at Chicago with us, and no one had to go to another room for screening or Finger printing.
My gut feeling is, we had our FP for 485 done earlier this year in US so they may not need another FP. The FP when using AP might be for people who have not gone thru FP for 485.
my 2 cents,
AP is easy no worries, as long as you have right papers ( AP ) you are good.
We were not asked for anything other than AP.
HTH
Now my experience may be different, but i believe there are some differences in the process.
My AP Experience:
No secondary check, i told officer that we are using AP. He said fine,
took both copies , stamped with AOS stamp and gave back both copies.
I donot think he made a copy for himself or even kept one original.
I was worried about re-entry as my wife had status change and had not gone back home after status change; and then this 485 filing.
But overall it was very sweet.
I must say there were few others going thru AP process at Chicago with us, and no one had to go to another room for screening or Finger printing.
My gut feeling is, we had our FP for 485 done earlier this year in US so they may not need another FP. The FP when using AP might be for people who have not gone thru FP for 485.
my 2 cents,
AP is easy no worries, as long as you have right papers ( AP ) you are good.
We were not asked for anything other than AP.
HTH
more...
pictures small dog breeds that don.
eb3_nepa
11-06 04:30 PM
Here is the link with the clarification released on Jun 6th By Michael Aytes, Astt Director of USCIS regarding Non Cap h1B's
http://149.101.23.2/graphics/lawsregs/handbook/AC21C060606.pdf
These roles qualify for non cap H1B's
* Renewals of existing H1b's
* If are working for a not for profit institution
* If you are working for a institute of higher education ( as defined by the US education act of 1964, institutes like 2 yr and 4 year colleges and some high schools which have teacher education programs with schools of education in these colleges) or a government research institution or a company associated with the above institutions where the primary objective of the company is to supplement the mission of the institutions, example would be a company providing research assistants to a reseach medical hospital. In this case the company is not cap exempt but the job involves the institution that is cap exempt.
What kind of institution will your wife be a financial analyst in?
I am not an attorney, pls consult an attorney regarding your specific case. Hope this information helps.
My Wife, if everything works out, will be working in a Finance related field for a Health Care related service providing financial services to many many hospitals.
I was wondering if I could use the Heallth care angle for the H1b Non Cap
http://149.101.23.2/graphics/lawsregs/handbook/AC21C060606.pdf
These roles qualify for non cap H1B's
* Renewals of existing H1b's
* If are working for a not for profit institution
* If you are working for a institute of higher education ( as defined by the US education act of 1964, institutes like 2 yr and 4 year colleges and some high schools which have teacher education programs with schools of education in these colleges) or a government research institution or a company associated with the above institutions where the primary objective of the company is to supplement the mission of the institutions, example would be a company providing research assistants to a reseach medical hospital. In this case the company is not cap exempt but the job involves the institution that is cap exempt.
What kind of institution will your wife be a financial analyst in?
I am not an attorney, pls consult an attorney regarding your specific case. Hope this information helps.
My Wife, if everything works out, will be working in a Finance related field for a Health Care related service providing financial services to many many hospitals.
I was wondering if I could use the Heallth care angle for the H1b Non Cap
dresses podengo grande dog
![dog breeds chart. Notice in this chart- [image]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_skcNqtMCAUINWl2R3SB9JntjtvClggYBazr0TIaBN4pd1rDSGEWm_9T-NDA31lifE8OPwtdTOLd9Ysj6CiUdsZ3iHzazyahSdV2jjsXsoRPQpFHlp40xldE1yMbGbqdZv0m29bZQiSb2tHKprO8jNtvVfZ=s0-d "Notice in this chart- [image]")
yganreddy
09-01 12:01 AM
They would have been happy with their half loaf.
more...
makeup Dogs+reeds+chart
ghost
02-07 03:13 PM
Hi
I clicked on the link provided but unfortunately I was not able to watch the video, can you please share what was concluded at the end of the session, any measures that they plan to take?
Thx
It's a long discussion but the summary in the last 2-3 mins suggests that
a) the temporary worker visas issue should not be tied to backlog reduction issue
b) other countries like canada and australia have already changed their immigration policies for high-skilled immigrants and US is falling behind
c) that the US government needs to provide clarity on the GC process one way or the other instead of keeping us in limbo
d) interesting observation by canadian economics lady professor - clearing the immigration backlog is the only immigration reform that is needed for US economy.
You've to understand that this is just a panel discussion and they can only make recommendations for execution by the politicians...they themselves cannot take any measures to resolve the issues.
Next steps are for us to support IV Advocacy (see separate threads for the April Advocacy) and lobby hard for the necessary legislative changes...this is a good presentation that can be used to to lobby for a piecemeal legislation/amendment for legal immigrant backlog reduction!
I clicked on the link provided but unfortunately I was not able to watch the video, can you please share what was concluded at the end of the session, any measures that they plan to take?
Thx
It's a long discussion but the summary in the last 2-3 mins suggests that
a) the temporary worker visas issue should not be tied to backlog reduction issue
b) other countries like canada and australia have already changed their immigration policies for high-skilled immigrants and US is falling behind
c) that the US government needs to provide clarity on the GC process one way or the other instead of keeping us in limbo
d) interesting observation by canadian economics lady professor - clearing the immigration backlog is the only immigration reform that is needed for US economy.
You've to understand that this is just a panel discussion and they can only make recommendations for execution by the politicians...they themselves cannot take any measures to resolve the issues.
Next steps are for us to support IV Advocacy (see separate threads for the April Advocacy) and lobby hard for the necessary legislative changes...this is a good presentation that can be used to to lobby for a piecemeal legislation/amendment for legal immigrant backlog reduction!
girlfriend Dog Breeds - B - Belgian
Munna Bhai
12-14 09:43 AM
I just received a USCIS automated e-mail indicating an RFE has been issued with regard to my pending I-140 (pending since January 16, 2007, at NSC)...have yet to receive the actual RFE letter. My AP application has been pending since August 1, 2007, also at NSC. Can this RFE delay processing of my AP? I need to travel this month and had also sent a fax to USCIS requesting expediting the I-131. Please let me know what you think, as I am very worried! What could the RFE be in regards to? I work for a university, have a 4 year degree (obtained in the US, along with an MBA), and ability to pay should not be an issue. No experience required!
Thanks!
I-485/I-765 filed July 6, 2007 - EB3
I-765 approved Sept. 11, 2007
I-131 filed Aug. 1 2007 & pending
FP completed Dec. 04, 2007
Please update us once you receive RFE, I will update the items.
Thanks!
I-485/I-765 filed July 6, 2007 - EB3
I-765 approved Sept. 11, 2007
I-131 filed Aug. 1 2007 & pending
FP completed Dec. 04, 2007
Please update us once you receive RFE, I will update the items.
hairstyles Welcome to the Dog Forum, inu.
vipatel3
10-17 03:56 PM
Hello Friends,
I have not received my 485 and 140 , filing receipts . The documenst were mailed on 30 july to Texas Center. Anyone have any idea which the best way to get information on waiting time.
I have not received my 485 and 140 , filing receipts . The documenst were mailed on 30 july to Texas Center. Anyone have any idea which the best way to get information on waiting time.
EndlessWait
06-18 04:00 PM
Under Part 3.
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. The visa on passport has expired and I had got an extension within US. Anybody any ideas????
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. The visa on passport has expired and I had got an extension within US. Anybody any ideas????
Chicago Desi
04-13 01:02 PM
All visa stamping is now done outside US. As long as you dont travel outside of USA, you can stay legally till the date mentioned on your I-94 attached on I797. But, if your H1 extension is subjected to your visa interview in Islamabad, you have to go to interview.
I dont know what DWI is, but whatever it is, do not hide it on your visa application. AFAIK, traffic violations are not criminal offences, but I might be wrong.
You better have criminal record strighten out with DHS ASAP, one wrong info and it will become a huge problem.
Good luck.
I dont know what DWI is, but whatever it is, do not hide it on your visa application. AFAIK, traffic violations are not criminal offences, but I might be wrong.
You better have criminal record strighten out with DHS ASAP, one wrong info and it will become a huge problem.
Good luck.
No comments:
Post a Comment