shanti
02-24 10:49 PM
Thank you all for your answers, and we could agree that there is not a clear straightforward guideline regarding the AC21. So I have the following doubts:
1- I really am not worried about the salary part, since the OCC code that the USCIS allocated for my labor certification pays in the area that I intend to work the same salary that their statistics show so that is fine. About the salary issue I talked with a couple of lawyer already,.
2- This is what I am concerned and is about the experience part. I read online that for porting a labor (or some situation of the kind before filing I-485) that you cannot use the experience gained on the labor sponsoring company but you could use anything before that employer.
Here is the question I have regarding that frozen experience clock:
a- Before coming to US I had 5 ys expeirence
b- WIth first H-1B sponsor company I worked 3 ys in U.S. until end of 2003
c- I joined my current employer B on H-1B and worked there all 2004 and they filed for labor in Feb 2005. So my question is.. as previous experience
I know I can count the three years with employer A since no labor there, but with employer B can I count that year before they filed for labor that I was under H-1b or I cannot count any experience gain before the labor was filed with employer B at all? I think that is the key question here.
1- I really am not worried about the salary part, since the OCC code that the USCIS allocated for my labor certification pays in the area that I intend to work the same salary that their statistics show so that is fine. About the salary issue I talked with a couple of lawyer already,.
2- This is what I am concerned and is about the experience part. I read online that for porting a labor (or some situation of the kind before filing I-485) that you cannot use the experience gained on the labor sponsoring company but you could use anything before that employer.
Here is the question I have regarding that frozen experience clock:
a- Before coming to US I had 5 ys expeirence
b- WIth first H-1B sponsor company I worked 3 ys in U.S. until end of 2003
c- I joined my current employer B on H-1B and worked there all 2004 and they filed for labor in Feb 2005. So my question is.. as previous experience
I know I can count the three years with employer A since no labor there, but with employer B can I count that year before they filed for labor that I was under H-1b or I cannot count any experience gain before the labor was filed with employer B at all? I think that is the key question here.
seekerofpeace
09-10 11:42 PM
You are either unmarried or Divorced....Absolutely kidding :)
valleywag
07-30 01:21 PM
is this common for all those who have a primary vendor between the employer and the client ? or they are just doing it in random ?
Though i live in hyd i chose delhi for appointment coz previous stampings from delhi had no issues :(
Though i live in hyd i chose delhi for appointment coz previous stampings from delhi had no issues :(
san3297
09-02 09:17 AM
I went to border and security deffered inspection site at Raliegh NC from this url
http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/toolbox/contacts/deferred_inspection/deferred_inspection_sites.ctt/deferred_inspection_sites.pdf.
The Immigration Officer said to me I 94 can be given only till visa date.He said that you can stay as long as you want in US as you have 797 valid after your H1 stamp date.He said everything is fine not to worry.What shall i do now? I am confused.Can some one point me to site or link on USCIS which states this law.Can some attorneys point this link.
http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/toolbox/contacts/deferred_inspection/deferred_inspection_sites.ctt/deferred_inspection_sites.pdf.
The Immigration Officer said to me I 94 can be given only till visa date.He said that you can stay as long as you want in US as you have 797 valid after your H1 stamp date.He said everything is fine not to worry.What shall i do now? I am confused.Can some one point me to site or link on USCIS which states this law.Can some attorneys point this link.
more...
milind70
10-31 08:45 AM
Should address on Drivers license and Address that we provide for USCIS should it match ?
I am a consultant hence i have given a friends address who own a home so that i dont need to change it often. Now i live in a different state (ofcourse temporarily) and since its USCIS i gave this address for any correspondence to USCIS. Now in future if i apply for any new forms many people have mentioned sending Drivers License but if i sent it it has a different address on it. is copy of drivers license mandatory? how does it work ?
If it is in the same state I think you are fine, I went for FP rececntly and I had a DL which had my three year old address( though i did change online on DMV website and they send me a paper card satting my new adress) as for a new card they charged some money so i never changed it.It is 3 years since i have moved to my current address. I was not even asked anything at FP.
I am a consultant hence i have given a friends address who own a home so that i dont need to change it often. Now i live in a different state (ofcourse temporarily) and since its USCIS i gave this address for any correspondence to USCIS. Now in future if i apply for any new forms many people have mentioned sending Drivers License but if i sent it it has a different address on it. is copy of drivers license mandatory? how does it work ?
If it is in the same state I think you are fine, I went for FP rececntly and I had a DL which had my three year old address( though i did change online on DMV website and they send me a paper card satting my new adress) as for a new card they charged some money so i never changed it.It is 3 years since i have moved to my current address. I was not even asked anything at FP.
indygc
12-22 12:24 AM
Thanks guys for all your inputs.
God bless redcard & IVG*..give them some peace.
God bless redcard & IVG*..give them some peace.
more...
trips2010
08-27 07:36 PM
Any one get refund from USCIS ??
I sent EAD application on 05/01,was approved on 06/14 and never received to my address,called after 30 days of receiving email,they said card lost in the mail and they suggested to apply replacement card.I applied for replacement card,approved and also received last week and since monday receiving emails saying card production ordered on old one which was mentioned as lost in the email.I just spoke to USCIS representative,he suggested to send a letter to TSC for refund request.
any one sent letter for refund before ? do we have any form for refund ?
How this will work out ?
I sent EAD application on 05/01,was approved on 06/14 and never received to my address,called after 30 days of receiving email,they said card lost in the mail and they suggested to apply replacement card.I applied for replacement card,approved and also received last week and since monday receiving emails saying card production ordered on old one which was mentioned as lost in the email.I just spoke to USCIS representative,he suggested to send a letter to TSC for refund request.
any one sent letter for refund before ? do we have any form for refund ?
How this will work out ?
rakesh_one
10-10 10:47 AM
You have another option of attaching both the old and new fees in 2seperate checks along with a letter explaining your case,you can add in the letter that they could cash the check they felt right and return the other check.My attorney did this for me one time.You also consult your attorney for the same.
I faced similar issue on EAD. I have put two checks. One for 180 and other for 160. (total of 340). I have put a self addressed , pre-payed envelope and wrote a letter asking if they deem the fee is 180, then they can return or destroy the 160 check. I my case, they used both the checks and discorded the envelope.
I faced similar issue on EAD. I have put two checks. One for 180 and other for 160. (total of 340). I have put a self addressed , pre-payed envelope and wrote a letter asking if they deem the fee is 180, then they can return or destroy the 160 check. I my case, they used both the checks and discorded the envelope.
more...
geve
09-22 11:58 AM
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2008/tc20080915_270731.htm
There's no place like the U.S. when it comes to creating a thriving tech sector. Or is there? The U.S. still has the world's most competitive information technology industry, but its lead is slipping, according to a new study conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) for the Business Software Alliance (BSA).
The study, released Sept. 16, ranks 66 countries in six areas, including the availability of skilled labor, the "innovation friendliness" of a nation's culture, and the strength of its legal protections for intellectual property. The U.S. scored highest overall, but its rating fell from last year, and it was No. 1 in only three of the categories. "America should be proud that it's No. 1, but Americans should also be aware that it can no longer take its leadership for granted," says Robert Holleyman, president and CEO of the BSA, a Washington (D.C.)-based organization that promotes the interests of the software industry.
The EIU's analysis also weighed the quality of a nation's technology infrastructure, measuring the number of PCs per 100 people, market spending on IT hardware per 100 people, the availability of secure Internet servers per 100,000 people, and the percentage of the population with high-speed Internet access. Switzerland, ranked 11th overall, outscored the U.S. on IT infrastructure, which accounted for 20% of a country's score. The study also assessed the openness of a country's economy and the quality of government leadership on technology issues.
No. 5 in R&D Support
In a finding that's likely to vex would-be entrepreneurs, the U.S. scores even further down the list�No. 5�in support for R&D. Taiwan led the category, followed by South Korea, Japan, and Sweden. Here, the EIU scored countries based on the number of new IT-related patents, receipts from royalty payments and licensing fees, and public and private spending on R&D. Holleyman says the BSA plans to share its findings with both major Presidential campaigns and with members of Congress.
The U.S. also lags countries including Canada, Singapore, Britain, and Norway in support for IT development, which accounted for 15% of the overall score. This category covers such things as e-government initiatives, government spending on IT hardware, and access to financing.
The findings of the study will likely renew calls among both IT industry executives and politicians for the country to develop a national innovation strategy as countries such as Finland have done. "America needs a wake-up call," says John Kao, a former professor at Harvard Business School and author of Innovation Nation, a book arguing that the U.S. is losing its edge. "We don't really have a national strategy," he says. "And while I'm not a fan of top-down technocratic approach, I think that at this point in our history, having no strategy is not satisfactory."
Sounding the Alarm
As concerned as he is about U.S. competitiveness, Kao is not a favor of indexes that compare competitiveness among nations, saying they can misrepresent a country's true climate. "They're really abstractions of reality, and they often paint too rosy a picture," he says.
Kao isn't alone in calling the country's competitiveness into question. Judy Estrin, a former Cisco Systems (CSCO) executive, is sounding the alarm as well in a new book, Closing the Innovation Gap, published by BusinessWeek's parent, The McGraw-Hill Cos. (MHP). Estrin says that the lead America enjoys now is the result of work done decades ago, and that the same commitment to innovation and research that existed before has evaporated. "Innovation builds on innovation. We're reaping the benefits now of seeds planted 10, 20, and 30 years ago, and the problem is that we're not planting any more seeds," she says.
The study shows the U.S. still leads the world in the "human capital" category, which measures the number of students attending universities, a country's capacity to train scientists and engineers, and employment in the tech sector as a percentage of the overall workforce. Here too, though, the U.S. lead is threatened. While students from other countries still flock to U.S. universities to get their MBAs and PhDs, tight immigration policies are causing more of those students to go home after graduation. "Our own education system is not producing the innovators we need," Estrin says. "And we're not opening our doors to the best people, and our immigration policy is such that we have been making it harder for them to stay, and so they are going home and innovating elsewhere."
By highlighting vulnerabilities, the study doesn't just trumpet U.S. weaknesses; it points to areas where improvements can be made. "A strong tech industry is crucial to America's ability to address almost every economic and social challenge," Holleyman says in a statement. "Despite our current economic difficulties, the tech sector remains one of the primary engines of the U.S. economy. This index provides a guide to how we can keep that engine moving forward to ensure competitiveness in the future."
There's no place like the U.S. when it comes to creating a thriving tech sector. Or is there? The U.S. still has the world's most competitive information technology industry, but its lead is slipping, according to a new study conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) for the Business Software Alliance (BSA).
The study, released Sept. 16, ranks 66 countries in six areas, including the availability of skilled labor, the "innovation friendliness" of a nation's culture, and the strength of its legal protections for intellectual property. The U.S. scored highest overall, but its rating fell from last year, and it was No. 1 in only three of the categories. "America should be proud that it's No. 1, but Americans should also be aware that it can no longer take its leadership for granted," says Robert Holleyman, president and CEO of the BSA, a Washington (D.C.)-based organization that promotes the interests of the software industry.
The EIU's analysis also weighed the quality of a nation's technology infrastructure, measuring the number of PCs per 100 people, market spending on IT hardware per 100 people, the availability of secure Internet servers per 100,000 people, and the percentage of the population with high-speed Internet access. Switzerland, ranked 11th overall, outscored the U.S. on IT infrastructure, which accounted for 20% of a country's score. The study also assessed the openness of a country's economy and the quality of government leadership on technology issues.
No. 5 in R&D Support
In a finding that's likely to vex would-be entrepreneurs, the U.S. scores even further down the list�No. 5�in support for R&D. Taiwan led the category, followed by South Korea, Japan, and Sweden. Here, the EIU scored countries based on the number of new IT-related patents, receipts from royalty payments and licensing fees, and public and private spending on R&D. Holleyman says the BSA plans to share its findings with both major Presidential campaigns and with members of Congress.
The U.S. also lags countries including Canada, Singapore, Britain, and Norway in support for IT development, which accounted for 15% of the overall score. This category covers such things as e-government initiatives, government spending on IT hardware, and access to financing.
The findings of the study will likely renew calls among both IT industry executives and politicians for the country to develop a national innovation strategy as countries such as Finland have done. "America needs a wake-up call," says John Kao, a former professor at Harvard Business School and author of Innovation Nation, a book arguing that the U.S. is losing its edge. "We don't really have a national strategy," he says. "And while I'm not a fan of top-down technocratic approach, I think that at this point in our history, having no strategy is not satisfactory."
Sounding the Alarm
As concerned as he is about U.S. competitiveness, Kao is not a favor of indexes that compare competitiveness among nations, saying they can misrepresent a country's true climate. "They're really abstractions of reality, and they often paint too rosy a picture," he says.
Kao isn't alone in calling the country's competitiveness into question. Judy Estrin, a former Cisco Systems (CSCO) executive, is sounding the alarm as well in a new book, Closing the Innovation Gap, published by BusinessWeek's parent, The McGraw-Hill Cos. (MHP). Estrin says that the lead America enjoys now is the result of work done decades ago, and that the same commitment to innovation and research that existed before has evaporated. "Innovation builds on innovation. We're reaping the benefits now of seeds planted 10, 20, and 30 years ago, and the problem is that we're not planting any more seeds," she says.
The study shows the U.S. still leads the world in the "human capital" category, which measures the number of students attending universities, a country's capacity to train scientists and engineers, and employment in the tech sector as a percentage of the overall workforce. Here too, though, the U.S. lead is threatened. While students from other countries still flock to U.S. universities to get their MBAs and PhDs, tight immigration policies are causing more of those students to go home after graduation. "Our own education system is not producing the innovators we need," Estrin says. "And we're not opening our doors to the best people, and our immigration policy is such that we have been making it harder for them to stay, and so they are going home and innovating elsewhere."
By highlighting vulnerabilities, the study doesn't just trumpet U.S. weaknesses; it points to areas where improvements can be made. "A strong tech industry is crucial to America's ability to address almost every economic and social challenge," Holleyman says in a statement. "Despite our current economic difficulties, the tech sector remains one of the primary engines of the U.S. economy. This index provides a guide to how we can keep that engine moving forward to ensure competitiveness in the future."
Gundark
08-25 05:55 PM
I've got a few more ideas I'd like to try, but It'd be fun to do some that other people suggested. Maybe you need to solicit ideas in random to get more of an audience.
more...
same_old_guy
05-22 05:13 PM
Checking out this section of the bill :
(2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the time of
the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if such
provision remained effective and an approved petition may serve
as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
of filing of such labor certification application.
It says something about preserving priority date. Is there any provision to port the priority date from old system to new system. I am sure there would some sort of concept for priority date in the new system.
Now if we can transfer our priority date from old system we would definitely get some benefit in the new system. Any comments ?
(2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the time of
the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if such
provision remained effective and an approved petition may serve
as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
of filing of such labor certification application.
It says something about preserving priority date. Is there any provision to port the priority date from old system to new system. I am sure there would some sort of concept for priority date in the new system.
Now if we can transfer our priority date from old system we would definitely get some benefit in the new system. Any comments ?
cendra
04-30 11:15 AM
EB3-PD Jul 02
LC Approved Jan 07
I-140 Pending since March 07
LC Approved Jan 07
I-140 Pending since March 07
more...
mhtanim
07-03 02:03 PM
I am sorry for what you are going through.
What the heck is going on with the USCIS? It's seems like we are seeing too many denials without any RFEs nowadays!
What the heck is going on with the USCIS? It's seems like we are seeing too many denials without any RFEs nowadays!
chtting2me
01-02 07:32 PM
Still waiting for FP. Filled on 19th July @TSC
more...
karthiknv143
08-02 01:26 PM
Friends,
This is over and ordered to lie on table...... Moderator please close this thread...
This is over and ordered to lie on table...... Moderator please close this thread...
serg
10-30 08:53 PM
My lawyer confirmed that we can apply for renewal 6 months prior to expiration date.
Lawyer? So, You don't believe what was posted on USIS website?
Lawyer? So, You don't believe what was posted on USIS website?
more...
chintu25
08-28 10:07 PM
could you please review this thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/184288-from-iv-access-to-donor-forum-issues.html
if you are a recurring subscriber please mail details to info at immigrationvoice.org. We verify each member before adding in the donor forum.
mail is bouncing back to that id
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/184288-from-iv-access-to-donor-forum-issues.html
if you are a recurring subscriber please mail details to info at immigrationvoice.org. We verify each member before adding in the donor forum.
mail is bouncing back to that id
natrajs
09-05 12:11 PM
What's the big deal, if it is not this year may be in next few years another bill will be introduced. Bills will kept being introduced and some day one of those bill will pass.
Why should I worry about it? Do you really think you can make a difference?
Even the answer is yes, people with late priority dates should be more worried as they are the ones who will get their GC in several years. If they are not worried, why are you?
You know there is a saying that goes in my country, you can bring horse to water but you can't make him drink.
So dude take it easy... Even though in 5-10 years but folks will get their GC (of course assuming other things remain constant)
I may have early PD but it doesn't make GC is granted, rather than focus on �What�s in for me� please focus on common issue.
Great people had not thought about themselves, they always thought about the future.
There is old say in my country that a person who plants a tree will not be get benefited through that, but still plant it; the reason is that the person believes that the tree will give benefits to the future generations
Why should I worry about it? Do you really think you can make a difference?
Even the answer is yes, people with late priority dates should be more worried as they are the ones who will get their GC in several years. If they are not worried, why are you?
You know there is a saying that goes in my country, you can bring horse to water but you can't make him drink.
So dude take it easy... Even though in 5-10 years but folks will get their GC (of course assuming other things remain constant)
I may have early PD but it doesn't make GC is granted, rather than focus on �What�s in for me� please focus on common issue.
Great people had not thought about themselves, they always thought about the future.
There is old say in my country that a person who plants a tree will not be get benefited through that, but still plant it; the reason is that the person believes that the tree will give benefits to the future generations
chanduv23
12-11 06:47 AM
25,000 members, every day request to raise $30,000.
Why not happening? Even every member contribute $2, it becomes $50,000.
The question comes to whom contribute? This web site does not belong to me. If some question is in my mind, I can't start a thread. Which individual/group it belongs to? Who can start a thread? For the last 2-3 days, I am trying to find answers.
How many members are active? Is it or the orders of tengths or hundreds or thousands?
If with 25,000 members, raising $30,000 is difficult, there is some problem. One of the problem defenetly it is not open - even I asked, how can I start a thread, I did not get answer.
I think, core team to get into action to motivate people - as an example I am now so much demotivatied that thinking not visiting this site.
Core team firefights members all the time and puts off flames and at the same time runs the organization. Their dedication has always been extremely high.
Just because your question is not answered, does not mean there is something wrong in the organization.
IV is a volunteer organization and everyone are unpaid volunteers. We do not have a full time professional who works for money here who can attend to customer service calls on a 1-800 number.
If people are not contributing, does not mean core team has to be blamed. If you have noticed, there is a surge in contributions.
Yes, in an ideal world, 25000 members contribute, we have no issues. Can you take up some responsibility and run the finding drive? People are taking turns to run the funding drive. You are most welcome to help us. If you can convince 25000 people to contribute, it will be awsome
Why not happening? Even every member contribute $2, it becomes $50,000.
The question comes to whom contribute? This web site does not belong to me. If some question is in my mind, I can't start a thread. Which individual/group it belongs to? Who can start a thread? For the last 2-3 days, I am trying to find answers.
How many members are active? Is it or the orders of tengths or hundreds or thousands?
If with 25,000 members, raising $30,000 is difficult, there is some problem. One of the problem defenetly it is not open - even I asked, how can I start a thread, I did not get answer.
I think, core team to get into action to motivate people - as an example I am now so much demotivatied that thinking not visiting this site.
Core team firefights members all the time and puts off flames and at the same time runs the organization. Their dedication has always been extremely high.
Just because your question is not answered, does not mean there is something wrong in the organization.
IV is a volunteer organization and everyone are unpaid volunteers. We do not have a full time professional who works for money here who can attend to customer service calls on a 1-800 number.
If people are not contributing, does not mean core team has to be blamed. If you have noticed, there is a surge in contributions.
Yes, in an ideal world, 25000 members contribute, we have no issues. Can you take up some responsibility and run the finding drive? People are taking turns to run the funding drive. You are most welcome to help us. If you can convince 25000 people to contribute, it will be awsome
atlfp
04-09 03:39 PM
I guess Berkeleybee was talking about me....I posted a few theories in another thread regarding PACE act.
I certainly understand the IV has done a lot and am very excited about what you have achieved. Not sure how you view it, but I think posting my view in the forum is also a form of support. It may not be as much as you wanted, but nevertheless it by no mean is saying what you did was wrong, it's just some thing I thought about and I thought it might be worth to bring up. But If this bothers you then I have no problem to shut up.
Not sure why IV chose to lock up live update threading to member only though. Growing number of members is definitely good, but I am not sure about forcing people to register to read. People participant when there is a passion in it, forcing they into it more or less drive the passion away.
Just my 2 cents.
All,
Just to put this issue to bed once and for all. IV is committed to bringing its goals into legislation -- we are not wedded to any particular piece of legislation. If Plan A doesn't work, there is Plan B, C and D. Each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
There have been some people who have been saying "Comprehensive reform is dead IV should work on PACE/Poster's favorite option."
(1) It is not certain that CIR is dead. We are not about to toss it aside before the Senate has.
(2) IV is fully prepared for PACE -- we have studied all of PACE's provisons (have the theorists even done this?). Did you happen to notice that one of the co-sponsors of PACE has already offered an amendment for us? We also have support from other co-sponsors.
(3) Our amendments show that we have support no matter which legislation goes forward -- we have to shore up this support and make sure we get more for floor votes.
BTW, I notice that some of our new theorists became members only a few days ago, probably to read the live update threads, and just a few days after that they start opining about what IV should do. ;-) Have they done anything with/for IV: volunteer, contribute, send webfaxes? I doubt it.
Note to new members: please visit our Resources section and familiarize yourself with the material there, at the very least you'll see we have been doing our homework and we are not a one-theory-one-legislation group.
best,
Berkeleybee
I certainly understand the IV has done a lot and am very excited about what you have achieved. Not sure how you view it, but I think posting my view in the forum is also a form of support. It may not be as much as you wanted, but nevertheless it by no mean is saying what you did was wrong, it's just some thing I thought about and I thought it might be worth to bring up. But If this bothers you then I have no problem to shut up.
Not sure why IV chose to lock up live update threading to member only though. Growing number of members is definitely good, but I am not sure about forcing people to register to read. People participant when there is a passion in it, forcing they into it more or less drive the passion away.
Just my 2 cents.
All,
Just to put this issue to bed once and for all. IV is committed to bringing its goals into legislation -- we are not wedded to any particular piece of legislation. If Plan A doesn't work, there is Plan B, C and D. Each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
There have been some people who have been saying "Comprehensive reform is dead IV should work on PACE/Poster's favorite option."
(1) It is not certain that CIR is dead. We are not about to toss it aside before the Senate has.
(2) IV is fully prepared for PACE -- we have studied all of PACE's provisons (have the theorists even done this?). Did you happen to notice that one of the co-sponsors of PACE has already offered an amendment for us? We also have support from other co-sponsors.
(3) Our amendments show that we have support no matter which legislation goes forward -- we have to shore up this support and make sure we get more for floor votes.
BTW, I notice that some of our new theorists became members only a few days ago, probably to read the live update threads, and just a few days after that they start opining about what IV should do. ;-) Have they done anything with/for IV: volunteer, contribute, send webfaxes? I doubt it.
Note to new members: please visit our Resources section and familiarize yourself with the material there, at the very least you'll see we have been doing our homework and we are not a one-theory-one-legislation group.
best,
Berkeleybee
rajeshalex
07-30 09:29 AM
May be we can ask the important questions from everyone and filter it out/ask the top ten among them as a community?
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét