saibabu_d
07-18 06:21 PM
Hello,
With hard 7% limit per country; our numbers within EB category are at 10,000 (it's not a huge number even if we apply 7% on EB+FB).
There are at least 250,000 people waiting on GC from India alone, at this rate it will take 25 years.
Am I wrong, I really hope I'm terribly wrong.
With hard 7% limit per country; our numbers within EB category are at 10,000 (it's not a huge number even if we apply 7% on EB+FB).
There are at least 250,000 people waiting on GC from India alone, at this rate it will take 25 years.
Am I wrong, I really hope I'm terribly wrong.
wallpaper hot cute est friends forever
WaldenPond
11-13 04:11 PM
WaldenPond,
Thanks for all the efforts you have made for us. Just contributed 200$ , please ask others to contribute too. Together we all need to give that one last giant push......
Friends ,
I appeal to all of you, this is the best time to start enegizign ourself and contribute for the cause.... I have done my second contrbution ...let's do it..
Hello anurakt,
Thank for contributing again to IV. You and other members like yourself would be the reason for IVs success in changing the flawed green card system.
Thank you for encouraging other IV members for contributing. As you know, this is very important and more amongst us should encourage our fellow IV members to contribute. Often times it is evident that few IV members are struggling to keep a positive tone on the forums. As you may have experienced, it is easy to post few messages here and there. The message of some of these posts is to throw out ideas for others to implement. But in the end, the success of our community will depend on the contribution from kind members like you. Thank You.
Regards,
WaldenPond
Thanks for all the efforts you have made for us. Just contributed 200$ , please ask others to contribute too. Together we all need to give that one last giant push......
Friends ,
I appeal to all of you, this is the best time to start enegizign ourself and contribute for the cause.... I have done my second contrbution ...let's do it..
Hello anurakt,
Thank for contributing again to IV. You and other members like yourself would be the reason for IVs success in changing the flawed green card system.
Thank you for encouraging other IV members for contributing. As you know, this is very important and more amongst us should encourage our fellow IV members to contribute. Often times it is evident that few IV members are struggling to keep a positive tone on the forums. As you may have experienced, it is easy to post few messages here and there. The message of some of these posts is to throw out ideas for others to implement. But in the end, the success of our community will depend on the contribution from kind members like you. Thank You.
Regards,
WaldenPond
chanduv23
06-07 01:18 PM
Probably most of you are aware of these things. So, let me say this advice is for newbies in the job. Lay-offs are done for business reasons and cost considerations. An American friend of mine lost his managerial job after 18 years of loyalty and experience. Company did not see the reason to continue to be in that business and the entire division related to the business was laid off. So working hard is good. Definitely a deserved trait. Do it for self-satisfaction, but not out of fear of loosing the job. At the same time, we should not be cloistered within the company working long hours. There are other things imprtant in life apart from the eight hours we spend at the office. I tend to my hobbies to keep my sanity after work. I look out for business indicators/news regarding how my company is doing. Good financial planning mandates savings around 6-12 months of living expenses which would lessen the impact of lay-off.;)
Yes I learnt this the hard way when I was fired from a fulltime job after working 4 years and contributing with a lot of hard work and dedication. I was fired in less than a minute and I was in 6th year of h1b. LOYALTY TO JOB MUST NOT BE FOR THE REASON THAT THEY HOLD YOUR VISA AND GREEN CARD. I moved out to consulting company and now work on %age and now I don't really care about being artificially loyal to any client. This is more healthy, resume gets built and you do not have to worry about losing your visa and status as long as you are in project, and as such changing projects is not difficult these days.
Most of the immigrants tend to be artificially inclined and have love and affection towards their companies just because Green card process is going on. Companies love to be cuddled by you but will not go out of their way for you.
The very reason logiclife and other folks started this group is because we are on our own. It is a fact that we are at no advantage with retrogression. Offcourse there are choices and one always has choices. Keeping quiet and accepting crap is not right. Whether we succeed or not, we must not accept crap as "fact of life". There is a saying "If you can walk, you can work".
I also agree that "working long hours + artificial loyalty" on h1b just for a GC is not proper reasoning for this cause. The actual reason behind this cause is a broken system that definitely needs too be fixed.
Yes I learnt this the hard way when I was fired from a fulltime job after working 4 years and contributing with a lot of hard work and dedication. I was fired in less than a minute and I was in 6th year of h1b. LOYALTY TO JOB MUST NOT BE FOR THE REASON THAT THEY HOLD YOUR VISA AND GREEN CARD. I moved out to consulting company and now work on %age and now I don't really care about being artificially loyal to any client. This is more healthy, resume gets built and you do not have to worry about losing your visa and status as long as you are in project, and as such changing projects is not difficult these days.
Most of the immigrants tend to be artificially inclined and have love and affection towards their companies just because Green card process is going on. Companies love to be cuddled by you but will not go out of their way for you.
The very reason logiclife and other folks started this group is because we are on our own. It is a fact that we are at no advantage with retrogression. Offcourse there are choices and one always has choices. Keeping quiet and accepting crap is not right. Whether we succeed or not, we must not accept crap as "fact of life". There is a saying "If you can walk, you can work".
I also agree that "working long hours + artificial loyalty" on h1b just for a GC is not proper reasoning for this cause. The actual reason behind this cause is a broken system that definitely needs too be fixed.
2011 Best friends forever
mrdelhiite
07-16 10:46 AM
Done.
-M
-M
more...
bugsbunny
04-20 06:33 PM
a special "Debate thread" (not fight :) ) where anything goes is probably not a bad idea at this point. where certain members who want to debate can be granted access
The constant hijacking of every thread is getting tiresome. :(
The constant hijacking of every thread is getting tiresome. :(
mallu
10-16 01:08 PM
Are there only 3 people suffering from namechecks?
This issue can be pushed if we have strong support for it.
I believe most of the members of IV are in the receipt/FP mode. Newly filed mass.
Yet to worry about the namecheck. And for EB3 and EB2 post 2004 filers the burning issue is still country wide quota.
This issue can be pushed if we have strong support for it.
I believe most of the members of IV are in the receipt/FP mode. Newly filed mass.
Yet to worry about the namecheck. And for EB3 and EB2 post 2004 filers the burning issue is still country wide quota.
more...
bugsbunny
04-20 06:33 PM
a special "Debate thread" (not fight :) ) where anything goes is probably not a bad idea at this point. where certain members who want to debate can be granted access
The constant hijacking of every thread is getting tiresome. :(
The constant hijacking of every thread is getting tiresome. :(
2010 Best Friends Quotes, Graphics,
felix31
02-06 12:51 PM
lasts even that long.. it probably will be exhausted during April itself..
well, I have to keep my hopes up. Since I HAVE to wait to get H4 extension before I can apply for H1 transfer, I'd like to see them last long enough so that I can get an H1 IN time, this year.
It can be so disappointing to get the job but miss the quota for 2 consecutive years :mad: :mad: :mad: and then 2 years I was ineligible for H1 because of the 6 yr limit. :( :mad:
Anyway, every dog has its day and I am hoping this is the year when I get my H1. :D
well, I have to keep my hopes up. Since I HAVE to wait to get H4 extension before I can apply for H1 transfer, I'd like to see them last long enough so that I can get an H1 IN time, this year.
It can be so disappointing to get the job but miss the quota for 2 consecutive years :mad: :mad: :mad: and then 2 years I was ineligible for H1 because of the 6 yr limit. :( :mad:
Anyway, every dog has its day and I am hoping this is the year when I get my H1. :D
more...
Lasantha
09-25 09:15 AM
Just curious. Why do you claim ROW is receiving preferential treatment over India when all the countries get the same upper limit of the visas. Now if the Indians ask for more visas just because there are more Indians asking for green cards, wouldn't that be preferential treatment? :)
Quota system treats everybody anything but "equal". And this is not just the question of equality, because I am sure you agree that we are equals. It is the question of PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. You are in the category getting preferential treatment, so you oppose any change, you "create" arguements that you were "promised" a system when you came, and thus any change to the system, before you get your green card would be WRONG and UNFAIR. So you should continue to get that PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. And PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT to you is NOT WRONG AND UNFAIR. Right?
BTW, hope you liked the You tube video, Frank is really good. I do not want you to go, so that's why I posted the video. Hope it helped you to stick around. Now don't say you have the right to watch it 5 times and I can watch it only once because I am from India and you are ROW :D
Cheers,
Quota system treats everybody anything but "equal". And this is not just the question of equality, because I am sure you agree that we are equals. It is the question of PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. You are in the category getting preferential treatment, so you oppose any change, you "create" arguements that you were "promised" a system when you came, and thus any change to the system, before you get your green card would be WRONG and UNFAIR. So you should continue to get that PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. And PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT to you is NOT WRONG AND UNFAIR. Right?
BTW, hope you liked the You tube video, Frank is really good. I do not want you to go, so that's why I posted the video. Hope it helped you to stick around. Now don't say you have the right to watch it 5 times and I can watch it only once because I am from India and you are ROW :D
Cheers,
hair friends forever quotes
bugsbunny
04-20 06:46 PM
no one...and i mean no one... should be allowed to use foul language/ make personal attacks period....this is not allowed in most public forums...and it results in short term to long term banning and automatic deletion of posts.
more...
gc2005
11-16 12:01 PM
Any ideas if the SKIL bill might come up for discussion in the Lame duck session?
hot est friends forever quotes
nb_des
08-01 04:32 PM
Can anyone provide some useful insight based on personal experienceas to how valuable is Part Time MBA for oppurtunities in India?
I am IT professional with lot of experience and currently pursuing Part time MBA from a business school which is ranked in top 25 and not in top 10.
The way I see it that it will take me around 4 years to complete it and I have to invest atleast $30,000 even if I get employer to pay a part of it.
In the end if it fetches me a top notch management position it will be well worth it. However I see limited chances of getting into management positions in US just based on MBA degree however I am not sure about India.
Any thoughts?
I am IT professional with lot of experience and currently pursuing Part time MBA from a business school which is ranked in top 25 and not in top 10.
The way I see it that it will take me around 4 years to complete it and I have to invest atleast $30,000 even if I get employer to pay a part of it.
In the end if it fetches me a top notch management position it will be well worth it. However I see limited chances of getting into management positions in US just based on MBA degree however I am not sure about India.
Any thoughts?
more...
house quotes for est friends
JS2225
08-25 11:41 AM
I am with the same employer who sponsored GC. Until GC was approved I was with H1B visa. Is it neccessary for me to file I-9 after GC?
tattoo cute est friends forever
unitednations
03-31 11:51 AM
I (and I�m sure others too) would like to know how the following works,
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
more...
pictures house est friends forever
qplearn
09-13 03:07 PM
Folks,
I am speaking in my personal capacity here. While I am all for freedom of expression and assembly, I don't think that rallies will in any way help our cause. We have to talk to people and participate in various forums to make them aware of our cause. Standing and protesting is not going to help us, because our voice will still be lost in the din...we need to speak where it matters and be heard where it matters...
RR
I am not saying rallying is the only way, but do remember that participating in rallies will get us some recognition.
CNN will always ignore us thanks to our friend there, but has New York Times ever reported our plight? Has Jim Leherer ever talked about us? The main stream media does not even know us!
We need to do something that catches the attention of the media; just getting more members and more funds may not be enough. We need to write letters to editors of major newspapers like NYTIMES and WASH POST.
I am so glad about the strong reponse to this thread.
I am speaking in my personal capacity here. While I am all for freedom of expression and assembly, I don't think that rallies will in any way help our cause. We have to talk to people and participate in various forums to make them aware of our cause. Standing and protesting is not going to help us, because our voice will still be lost in the din...we need to speak where it matters and be heard where it matters...
RR
I am not saying rallying is the only way, but do remember that participating in rallies will get us some recognition.
CNN will always ignore us thanks to our friend there, but has New York Times ever reported our plight? Has Jim Leherer ever talked about us? The main stream media does not even know us!
We need to do something that catches the attention of the media; just getting more members and more funds may not be enough. We need to write letters to editors of major newspapers like NYTIMES and WASH POST.
I am so glad about the strong reponse to this thread.
dresses quotes on friends forever.
saurav_4096
10-09 05:47 PM
I have a valid H1 approval till 2011 and used AP for my previous india visit. Right now i am transfering my H1 to a new company.
I asked my lawyer if i was on H1 status or not? She replied, Unitl you use EAD, i will be on H1B Status.
and also we can transfer our H1 to new company also. thats what i am doing now.
hope this helps!! and this was the answer from 2 lawyers which i asked.
Duration for I-94 while entering on AP is same as validity for AP. I am not sure what will happen in the scenario below:
A person on H1B validity for two years enters US on AP, which was valid for an year. He/She gets I-94 for only one year. in case person do not have any travel plan for next two year, will he be out of status after year as I-94 would have expird after one year and he/she kept working for H1B sponserer for two years.
Another questuon is Does renewed AP also comes with new I-94, like H1B renewals?
Saurav
I asked my lawyer if i was on H1 status or not? She replied, Unitl you use EAD, i will be on H1B Status.
and also we can transfer our H1 to new company also. thats what i am doing now.
hope this helps!! and this was the answer from 2 lawyers which i asked.
Duration for I-94 while entering on AP is same as validity for AP. I am not sure what will happen in the scenario below:
A person on H1B validity for two years enters US on AP, which was valid for an year. He/She gets I-94 for only one year. in case person do not have any travel plan for next two year, will he be out of status after year as I-94 would have expird after one year and he/she kept working for H1B sponserer for two years.
Another questuon is Does renewed AP also comes with new I-94, like H1B renewals?
Saurav
more...
makeup Best Friends Forever Quotes
sc3
08-11 02:35 PM
Sorry for ignorance, but what would you fetch from these voting results? There were already more than 100's threads before and as of now, if I am correct never seen any estimate data from any of us.
Its just sheer waste of time in calculating estimates. USCIS has its own rules and no one can predict them.
Just a thought. Please post the estimate data if you ever get, something?
Best of luck.
I guess it has less to do with estimates, and more about looking at the landscape. If there are significant portion of responses are above your date, one might, for example, choose to initiate porting/reclassification process if one qualifies for it.
Good thread. I am wondering the reasons for lack of response between Jan and March of 2002.
Its just sheer waste of time in calculating estimates. USCIS has its own rules and no one can predict them.
Just a thought. Please post the estimate data if you ever get, something?
Best of luck.
I guess it has less to do with estimates, and more about looking at the landscape. If there are significant portion of responses are above your date, one might, for example, choose to initiate porting/reclassification process if one qualifies for it.
Good thread. I am wondering the reasons for lack of response between Jan and March of 2002.
girlfriend forever. Free Best Friends
STAmisha
02-28 10:41 AM
They can also make labors portable between employers ie the PD of the labor is portable irrespective of its state! But I hope they have that vision and wisdom.Also please make us apply 485 without the need to visa number.90% of our problems will disappear
hairstyles quotes on est friends
desi3933
05-08 06:20 PM
Feedbacks I have received for my post -
http://i39.tinypic.com/2jcvnh5.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/2jcvnh5.jpg
nashim
08-11 12:41 PM
done,
dec 04
dec 04
jimytomy
04-19 10:37 AM
Jimmy,
Did you change employer when you ported from eb3 to eb2, or stayed with the same employer?
- 2004 filed for Labor and started EB3 process.
- Company got acquired in later years . Filed new I140 ( I think it is called successor-in-interest)
- Recently started fresh EB2 process for interfiling of EB3 to EB2 . GC approved.
Thanks,
Jimytomy
Did you change employer when you ported from eb3 to eb2, or stayed with the same employer?
- 2004 filed for Labor and started EB3 process.
- Company got acquired in later years . Filed new I140 ( I think it is called successor-in-interest)
- Recently started fresh EB2 process for interfiling of EB3 to EB2 . GC approved.
Thanks,
Jimytomy
No comments:
Post a Comment