sanjaymk
07-20 10:18 AM
please count me in for $50 for this and another $50 for the core. Let me know the address for the aman kapoor reimbursement fund.
Sanjay.
Sanjay.
wallpaper megan fox hair colour. megan
delax
07-27 08:01 PM
Earlier it was like this:
EB2 ROW --> EB3 ROW
If any left over after that then remaining numbers were equally divided between EB2-I/C and EB3-I/C so both EB2-I and EB3-I were getting equal share of spillover. Thats the way it should be.
If that were to be the case then EBROW should never have been retrogressed. E3ROW has been retrogressed for the last 20 months now.
EB2 ROW --> EB3 ROW
If any left over after that then remaining numbers were equally divided between EB2-I/C and EB3-I/C so both EB2-I and EB3-I were getting equal share of spillover. Thats the way it should be.
If that were to be the case then EBROW should never have been retrogressed. E3ROW has been retrogressed for the last 20 months now.
eb3_nepa
08-13 05:30 PM
:confused:
Please participate in publicity campaign for the Sep 18th rally at DC (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=141453#post141453)
:confused:
Dude pls stop advertising about the rally, we all know about it and we're coming. Pls stop posting the same info about the rally over and over again. If the Title in BOLD RED does not attract people's attention on the Homepage i dont think your posts are going to do it either.
Please participate in publicity campaign for the Sep 18th rally at DC (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=141453#post141453)
:confused:
Dude pls stop advertising about the rally, we all know about it and we're coming. Pls stop posting the same info about the rally over and over again. If the Title in BOLD RED does not attract people's attention on the Homepage i dont think your posts are going to do it either.
2011 Megan Fox
gjoe
10-08 05:12 PM
No one is saying people are cutting the line. Most of us are saying USCIS is not processing cases on FIFO. Either you don't know the fact that USCIS approves cases in whatever order they are doing now or you are just pretending to be ignorant of the fact.
I don't know for whatever reason you don't see the fact what people are talking about here, but I don't blame you. If what people want here doesn't suit our case we may not like it. But please, just trying to beat around the bush is not going to help anyone here for that matter not just me alone.
You suggestion of sending flowers seems like that is the only solution to all the problems. I would say the reversal of the July 2 visa bulletine didn't just happen because of the flowers the members sent, the law suit AILA wanted to file against USCIS was one of the major reason apart from the California's Lawmakers letter. So please don't try to cut peoples idea by trying to belittle them, if you don't agree with them it is ok, if everyone agreed on the same thing life will be so dull.
gjoe/and others,
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
I don't know for whatever reason you don't see the fact what people are talking about here, but I don't blame you. If what people want here doesn't suit our case we may not like it. But please, just trying to beat around the bush is not going to help anyone here for that matter not just me alone.
You suggestion of sending flowers seems like that is the only solution to all the problems. I would say the reversal of the July 2 visa bulletine didn't just happen because of the flowers the members sent, the law suit AILA wanted to file against USCIS was one of the major reason apart from the California's Lawmakers letter. So please don't try to cut peoples idea by trying to belittle them, if you don't agree with them it is ok, if everyone agreed on the same thing life will be so dull.
gjoe/and others,
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
more...
pointlesswait
09-10 02:37 PM
Instead of working on recapture..we must work on filing for 485 even if PD's are not current.. this way.. atleast in this recession ppl can be assured of some piece of mind.
visa recapturing will not happen..am not being pessimistic..its just too much of a hassle...needs a law and all that.. too complicated.
allowing to file for 485 can be bought back as a temporary relief..we should work on that!
visa recapturing will not happen..am not being pessimistic..its just too much of a hassle...needs a law and all that.. too complicated.
allowing to file for 485 can be bought back as a temporary relief..we should work on that!
485Mbe4001
03-08 02:24 PM
very well said... i encounter this all the time when i talk about IV to others...(extreme ignorance, indifference, lack of optimism, lethargy, let someone else do my work and finally superfical sympathy)
We have everything to gain and and little to loose, still no one cares...
your quote "After paying taxes, after following all immigration laws, after getting all the education in the world to become "Highly skilled", the highly skilled cant bring themselves to stand-up with a straight spine, thump their desk and talk to their lawmaker."
sums it all up.
Yes, and a lot of people know that there are highly skilled people who are depressed and that takes a toll on employee productivity.
....
.
We have everything to gain and and little to loose, still no one cares...
your quote "After paying taxes, after following all immigration laws, after getting all the education in the world to become "Highly skilled", the highly skilled cant bring themselves to stand-up with a straight spine, thump their desk and talk to their lawmaker."
sums it all up.
Yes, and a lot of people know that there are highly skilled people who are depressed and that takes a toll on employee productivity.
....
.
more...
FrankZulu
08-26 01:14 PM
CPO today. Case at local office. Had 1 interview where all documents for status and taxes were checked for the past 12 years. Never had a problem or gap in status and IO was surprised why the case came to local office. I was atleast happy that the interview is the worst thing that can happen and I am done through that.
After 3 infopass appts, 2 SRs in all have the CPO in hand.
Good luck all.
Was your Employer (GC Sponsoring) in any kind of trouble in past?
After 3 infopass appts, 2 SRs in all have the CPO in hand.
Good luck all.
Was your Employer (GC Sponsoring) in any kind of trouble in past?
2010 Thumbnail image for megan-fox-
mike_2000_la
06-08 12:29 AM
I think the real rush would be this week....
more...
samrat_bhargava_vihari
06-18 08:53 AM
I am waiting ..
I am waiting.. and few more friends none of us got receipt. our checks got cashed on last Monday.
I am waiting.. and few more friends none of us got receipt. our checks got cashed on last Monday.
hair megan fox dark hair
Sideliner
07-20 09:36 AM
100$ from me. Please let me know how and when. Thanks
more...
franklin
07-10 06:16 PM
I am in the bay area and can help organize this. I have sent an request to add myself on the yahoo group.
PM me, I can send you conference call details
PM me, I can send you conference call details
hot megan fox
CADude
08-18 06:54 PM
Your check should be cleared by now, if you have given yours or check with Attorney.
Please call USCIS Customer Service and ask for clarification.
LUD on 08/05/07
Other details are in signature.
Please call USCIS Customer Service and ask for clarification.
LUD on 08/05/07
Other details are in signature.
more...
house megan fox transformers 2 white
Aah_GC
05-19 09:42 PM
Same boat guys. July 07 filer and have not received my FP yet. My lawyer thinks it should not be a problem at all, and I read of a case here who got his GC without ever fingerprinting.
Am about to renew my EAD and AP in a couple of week's time and that is the only hope left. I sincerely hope not receiving FP is not a major drawback.
God bless.
Am about to renew my EAD and AP in a couple of week's time and that is the only hope left. I sincerely hope not receiving FP is not a major drawback.
God bless.
tattoo Megan Fox looked thinner than
CADude
10-10 05:55 PM
I send my Employment based I-485/I-765/I-131 application on June 29th 2007 and received at NSC on July 2nd 2007 (USPS Express mail tracking no. XXXX). It�s more than 100 days and I didn�t even received the Receipt Number for all the applications.
I have following question for CIS Ombudsman�s office:
1) Per US Law, I have to get the EAD in 90 days of filling of my application? How I can get the EAD in 90 days where I didn�t even get the Receipt Number after 100 days?
2) Why �First In First Out (FIFO)� process is not followed by USCIS for receipting? It�s unfair to applicant like me when application filed on August 17th 2007 enjoying the EAD card and able to work.
3) What action you can will take to force USCIS follow their own operational manual guidelines and follow FIFO in future?
I have following question for CIS Ombudsman�s office:
1) Per US Law, I have to get the EAD in 90 days of filling of my application? How I can get the EAD in 90 days where I didn�t even get the Receipt Number after 100 days?
2) Why �First In First Out (FIFO)� process is not followed by USCIS for receipting? It�s unfair to applicant like me when application filed on August 17th 2007 enjoying the EAD card and able to work.
3) What action you can will take to force USCIS follow their own operational manual guidelines and follow FIFO in future?
more...
pictures Re: Megan Fox#39;s Make-Up Looks
VMH_GC
07-06 08:47 PM
People lives in Tri state, shall we have similar rally in New york City on July 14th?
dresses Megan
alterego
03-07 03:54 PM
I don't think people are in reality. We are in an environment that we have to be diligent that they don't make it harder then what it is; rather then making it easier.
People started playing the devils advocate that if there is quotas on EB then there should also be quota on H-1b; sort of trying to say if there isn't quota on h-1b then there shouldn't be on EB.
A little while ago; some Indian nationals who were here on H-2 visa to help with re-construcing mississipi and louisiana after hurrican katrina got the bright idea to do a march and go public with their grievances. Their grievances were that they paid $15K to come to USA; they were given poor housing, poor working conditions and they want to get greencards.
Do you think they got greencards? No; now the law has been changed to not include India as part of H-2 visas.
Everyone should try to understand the reality that we are in.
I agree that legislators are very aware of the difference between the H1b issue and the green card issue. Yesterday on CNBC, Larry Kudlow interviewed Sen. Grassley from Iowa on this topic. When Larry was asking about these workers contributing to society, buying homes, starting companies etc, Sen. Grassley told him he was mixing up two separate issues. Basically he only wanted to talk about the H1b issue.
The sad truth is these guys(like Sen. Grassley) are anti immigrant period(they give you all the blabber about I am 3 generations separated from immigrants etc. but that is quite simply them satisfying their conscience/the public conscience on this issue, I always wish the interviewer is an American indeginous Indian), and instead of saying so openly, they combine the issues when convenient and separate them out when not so. I agree with you that it is not because they are not aware. Right now their focus is on stomping out fraud, he mentioned cases of people coming on H1b and running laundromats, or working in different locations to what they are certified(ouch). The new quota that opens up on Apr. 1 will indeed be a watershed. I am expecting really restrictive and nasty legislation in time to greet this. I truly hope for very few applications, so the Hon. Sen. understands that this is a demand driven issue for the most part and fraud where it exists can be addressed but not with blanket legislation which effects can be unintended.
Nonetheless this issue of Country caps has become so draconian that if indeed the US changes its policy and institutes country caps on H1bs as your posting suggests they might in the end, then we will have things go in a certain direction.......protectionist, and there will doubtless be backlash. As it stands the current insensible policy is such that people come on H1b, settle into a job, have their US citizen kids, accumulate enough social security credits, savings etc and then facing an inordinate wait, perhaps even have to leave, what do you think the result is going to be? Well, the return to India where US employers given their US experience/education are more comfortable hiring them hence more outsourcing, then their US citizen Kids return for Gov't aid/loans to college, then they sponsor their parents to come in and receive social security and medicare etc. while their working contributions and taxes would have accrued to another country. Really? Does that sound like good policy?
If the US chooses to Cap Indian H1bs fine, let it be, however continuing such policy only leads to and effectual ban on EB green cards for Indians.
People started playing the devils advocate that if there is quotas on EB then there should also be quota on H-1b; sort of trying to say if there isn't quota on h-1b then there shouldn't be on EB.
A little while ago; some Indian nationals who were here on H-2 visa to help with re-construcing mississipi and louisiana after hurrican katrina got the bright idea to do a march and go public with their grievances. Their grievances were that they paid $15K to come to USA; they were given poor housing, poor working conditions and they want to get greencards.
Do you think they got greencards? No; now the law has been changed to not include India as part of H-2 visas.
Everyone should try to understand the reality that we are in.
I agree that legislators are very aware of the difference between the H1b issue and the green card issue. Yesterday on CNBC, Larry Kudlow interviewed Sen. Grassley from Iowa on this topic. When Larry was asking about these workers contributing to society, buying homes, starting companies etc, Sen. Grassley told him he was mixing up two separate issues. Basically he only wanted to talk about the H1b issue.
The sad truth is these guys(like Sen. Grassley) are anti immigrant period(they give you all the blabber about I am 3 generations separated from immigrants etc. but that is quite simply them satisfying their conscience/the public conscience on this issue, I always wish the interviewer is an American indeginous Indian), and instead of saying so openly, they combine the issues when convenient and separate them out when not so. I agree with you that it is not because they are not aware. Right now their focus is on stomping out fraud, he mentioned cases of people coming on H1b and running laundromats, or working in different locations to what they are certified(ouch). The new quota that opens up on Apr. 1 will indeed be a watershed. I am expecting really restrictive and nasty legislation in time to greet this. I truly hope for very few applications, so the Hon. Sen. understands that this is a demand driven issue for the most part and fraud where it exists can be addressed but not with blanket legislation which effects can be unintended.
Nonetheless this issue of Country caps has become so draconian that if indeed the US changes its policy and institutes country caps on H1bs as your posting suggests they might in the end, then we will have things go in a certain direction.......protectionist, and there will doubtless be backlash. As it stands the current insensible policy is such that people come on H1b, settle into a job, have their US citizen kids, accumulate enough social security credits, savings etc and then facing an inordinate wait, perhaps even have to leave, what do you think the result is going to be? Well, the return to India where US employers given their US experience/education are more comfortable hiring them hence more outsourcing, then their US citizen Kids return for Gov't aid/loans to college, then they sponsor their parents to come in and receive social security and medicare etc. while their working contributions and taxes would have accrued to another country. Really? Does that sound like good policy?
If the US chooses to Cap Indian H1bs fine, let it be, however continuing such policy only leads to and effectual ban on EB green cards for Indians.
more...
makeup Megan Fox amp; Brian Green
.jpg "megan fox transformers 2 white")
shreekarthik
10-08 06:40 PM
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
girlfriend Painfully thin Cheryl Cole
delax
07-27 01:48 PM
Under the latest interpretation, EB3-I India will not get benefit until EB3-ROW gets benefit. So EB3-ROW benefiting will eventually benefit Eb3-I. That is the logical background.
The other two issues , which provided temporary relief, would have been redundant If we had recaptured the visas. Most of us, across the EB category/Country, would have been current or near current , rendering these issues redundant.
IV still went ahead with it (I am glad) knowing fully well recapture is difficult issue.
So no harm in EB3-I seeking temporary relief while still joining forces on the recapture issue.
Now you need to explain How EB3-I seeking favorable interpretation of spill over distribution undermines "Recapture effort". How are these related??
Chmur; I appreciate your post. For the sake of a discussion could you share what is the temporary relief that you are seeking. I am curious to know the details. Is it
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
The other two issues , which provided temporary relief, would have been redundant If we had recaptured the visas. Most of us, across the EB category/Country, would have been current or near current , rendering these issues redundant.
IV still went ahead with it (I am glad) knowing fully well recapture is difficult issue.
So no harm in EB3-I seeking temporary relief while still joining forces on the recapture issue.
Now you need to explain How EB3-I seeking favorable interpretation of spill over distribution undermines "Recapture effort". How are these related??
Chmur; I appreciate your post. For the sake of a discussion could you share what is the temporary relief that you are seeking. I am curious to know the details. Is it
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
hairstyles megan fox hair highlights.
Libra
08-20 12:38 PM
Dude, what makes you feel better? let me try, my case pd is Mar 18th 2005, RD july 2nd 2007 and ND July 28th 2007.
It is assigned to officer on 28th June, no issues with case, all are in place like name check, background check, finger prints valid till next year, officer touched my case on july 12th and 28th, no RFE sent so far as per IO and don't know why it is still sitting on officers desk. I did everything SR, 2 infopass, senators, congresswomen, Ombudsman, NSC follow up emails, SCOPSSCATTA email, nothing worked so far.
I think you will leave the boat before me, good luck.
Ha ha Congrats....
Story of my life. I complain about delay with my application. Someone joins me and tells me they are in the same boat and the very next day that someone leaves the boat and jumps into "greener" pastures. Everyone is leaving the boat and I seem to be left out :(
Who else are in my boat? (Application with an officer for over 2 weeks and still status = "Initial Review")
It is assigned to officer on 28th June, no issues with case, all are in place like name check, background check, finger prints valid till next year, officer touched my case on july 12th and 28th, no RFE sent so far as per IO and don't know why it is still sitting on officers desk. I did everything SR, 2 infopass, senators, congresswomen, Ombudsman, NSC follow up emails, SCOPSSCATTA email, nothing worked so far.
I think you will leave the boat before me, good luck.
Ha ha Congrats....
Story of my life. I complain about delay with my application. Someone joins me and tells me they are in the same boat and the very next day that someone leaves the boat and jumps into "greener" pastures. Everyone is leaving the boat and I seem to be left out :(
Who else are in my boat? (Application with an officer for over 2 weeks and still status = "Initial Review")
bheemi
06-21 02:04 PM
I would request as whole us know that CIR will not comeup this yeat..I would request if there is any plan IV is mkaing in this regard. I dont think waiting until end of July and then proceed for new bill is good way...
I would request to look for some alternatives from now itself..atleast filing 485 under retrogression and 3 year ead/ap..
any thoughts about this?
I would request to look for some alternatives from now itself..atleast filing 485 under retrogression and 3 year ead/ap..
any thoughts about this?
lins
08-24 01:43 PM
Got the CPO email at 11 PST today (8/24) !!!
Priority Date: Feb 12, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
I opened an SR on 8/9 but I haven't received any response to it. I didn't do anything else.
A huge Thanks to IV and everyone here - you kept the hopes up.
I'll contribute more as soon as I get my head out of the clouds :)
Thanks and Good luck!
Priority Date: Feb 12, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
I opened an SR on 8/9 but I haven't received any response to it. I didn't do anything else.
A huge Thanks to IV and everyone here - you kept the hopes up.
I'll contribute more as soon as I get my head out of the clouds :)
Thanks and Good luck!
No comments:
Post a Comment