prinive
02-18 03:35 PM
Last Up Date
I am fairly new to this community and not familiar with acronyms.
Can someone kindly explain what LUD is ?
My PD is now current as well and want to find out how to track my case.
Thanks for everyone's collective support. :D
I am fairly new to this community and not familiar with acronyms.
Can someone kindly explain what LUD is ?
My PD is now current as well and want to find out how to track my case.
Thanks for everyone's collective support. :D
wallpaper short haircuts 2011 men.
ntpatil
04-26 04:18 PM
Hello All,
Sorry for the post outside immigration boundaries.
My wife with 2 toddler kids will be traveling to India via Lufthansa.
I wanted to know from recent experiences how many check-in bags are allowed per person. My kids are 4 yrs old and they have a full ticket.
I know that some airlines only allow 1 checking per person, but wanted to know about Lufthansa specifically.
I could not find a clear answer on Lufthansa.com for baggage allowance to either India or Asia.
Thanks in advance for all your help.
Sorry for the post outside immigration boundaries.
My wife with 2 toddler kids will be traveling to India via Lufthansa.
I wanted to know from recent experiences how many check-in bags are allowed per person. My kids are 4 yrs old and they have a full ticket.
I know that some airlines only allow 1 checking per person, but wanted to know about Lufthansa specifically.
I could not find a clear answer on Lufthansa.com for baggage allowance to either India or Asia.
Thanks in advance for all your help.
laststraw
11-09 05:47 PM
I just went through PERM and I140, both of them approved without audit/RFE, where the requirement was Masters + 10 years experience. The job role required this. The requirement should match the job role and what the company would do if they are hiring a new person for the job.
And I believe someone had asked whether you have 7 years experience after obtaining masters. That is not required. In my case I had only 4 years experience after masters, but more than 12 years total. The job requirement stated that Masters + 10 years and not Masters + 10 years after masters.
Hope this helps.
And I believe someone had asked whether you have 7 years experience after obtaining masters. That is not required. In my case I had only 4 years experience after masters, but more than 12 years total. The job requirement stated that Masters + 10 years and not Masters + 10 years after masters.
Hope this helps.
2011 new haircuts for men 2011.
cinqsit
10-31 12:26 PM
Can someone please give me the website link to book a visa appointment?
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
http://www.vfs-usa.co.in/ Yes its same for all consulates
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
http://www.vfs-usa.co.in/ Yes its same for all consulates
more...
tnite
06-18 04:04 PM
Under Part 3.
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. My current visa on passport has expired. Anybody any ideas????
1.Non immigrant visa number : put the number on the expired H1B stamp (in red color).Do not put the control number
2.whenever the expired visa was issued
3.whereever it was issued.
I assume you renewed your H1b eventhough you'r H1b stamp expired.
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. My current visa on passport has expired. Anybody any ideas????
1.Non immigrant visa number : put the number on the expired H1B stamp (in red color).Do not put the control number
2.whenever the expired visa was issued
3.whereever it was issued.
I assume you renewed your H1b eventhough you'r H1b stamp expired.
vxb2004
11-24 08:09 PM
Hello,
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
more...
usdreams
05-28 11:05 PM
Hi kzinzuwadia,
My infopass went well, in fact, it was good that I took it, the IO told me that due to some error on their part, my file is no longer with them, it was sent back to the main office, she requested my file back from the other office & they will process once it comes back, which takes approx. 2-3 weeks.
Due to that we didn't get my Wife's GC in the court, the IJ told us that since the primary don't have GC, she can't get it. Now we will have to wait another 5 months for her GC.
Does anyone know if the court date can be moved forward if I get my GC ?
Thank you kzinzuwadia.
My infopass went well, in fact, it was good that I took it, the IO told me that due to some error on their part, my file is no longer with them, it was sent back to the main office, she requested my file back from the other office & they will process once it comes back, which takes approx. 2-3 weeks.
Due to that we didn't get my Wife's GC in the court, the IJ told us that since the primary don't have GC, she can't get it. Now we will have to wait another 5 months for her GC.
Does anyone know if the court date can be moved forward if I get my GC ?
Thank you kzinzuwadia.
2010 short hair 2011 men. latest
pappu
01-07 07:18 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/
Please stay tuned for a massive IV campaign coming up. We will be announcing it tonight on the forums.
Contact your chapter leaders for various state chapter action items.
Please stay tuned for a massive IV campaign coming up. We will be announcing it tonight on the forums.
Contact your chapter leaders for various state chapter action items.
more...
radhay
02-01 01:27 PM
Here is what I would do..
1. Pay off your debts..
2. Collect 6 months of paycheck equivalent money in CDs.
3. Buy life insurance.
4. contribute to 401K if employer offers a match.
5. Start children's education fund (4o3b?)
6. Buy some gold may be 5-10% of savings.
7. Invest in US based large cap consistent dividend yielding stocks > 4% yield (example:- PFE & T).
8. Invest in an index fund with exposure to global economies with low expense ratio.
9. Invest in your health (gym membership or equipment etc..)
10. Buy some real estate if you can afford.
1. Pay off your debts..
2. Collect 6 months of paycheck equivalent money in CDs.
3. Buy life insurance.
4. contribute to 401K if employer offers a match.
5. Start children's education fund (4o3b?)
6. Buy some gold may be 5-10% of savings.
7. Invest in US based large cap consistent dividend yielding stocks > 4% yield (example:- PFE & T).
8. Invest in an index fund with exposure to global economies with low expense ratio.
9. Invest in your health (gym membership or equipment etc..)
10. Buy some real estate if you can afford.
hair Hairstyles For Men 2011 Short.
GKBest
10-24 04:45 PM
It said in the online instructions to call them if you didn't receive the cards within 30 days.
more...
lj_rr
09-01 02:35 PM
Looks like there are mail and fax options.
Did you indicate whether you need it in a CD instead of paper copy?
Also for the labor copy, should the request be sent to USCIS or DOL?
Google G639 (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-639.pdf) form for the pdf version. Here, it's already done. Just click on the link it will take you to the form you need to request the information. Fill it completely in as much details as possible and then get it notarized for your signature at a bank. Once notarized, mail the form out to the address shown on the form.
My personal experience:
I followed the exact procedure as explained above and it took me 3 months to get everything i requested as a pdf document files on a CD instead of paper copies. It depends upon how many requests they have in the pipeline. 3 months is not bad i think. Good luck for your request.
Did you indicate whether you need it in a CD instead of paper copy?
Also for the labor copy, should the request be sent to USCIS or DOL?
Google G639 (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-639.pdf) form for the pdf version. Here, it's already done. Just click on the link it will take you to the form you need to request the information. Fill it completely in as much details as possible and then get it notarized for your signature at a bank. Once notarized, mail the form out to the address shown on the form.
My personal experience:
I followed the exact procedure as explained above and it took me 3 months to get everything i requested as a pdf document files on a CD instead of paper copies. It depends upon how many requests they have in the pipeline. 3 months is not bad i think. Good luck for your request.
hot new hairstyles for men 2011.
Khujaokutta
05-12 03:38 PM
Then u should "Condiser Donating"....Condiser not Consider :D
more...
house short hair styles men 2011.
Desi_Hydrabadi
02-20 03:35 PM
All,
My PERM labor was filed in Dec 2006. I didn't know much about all the technicalities in that process. I found today, from the flcdatacenter website, my labor petition number and was shocked to see the wage mentioned in there is "50.34", "Hr". I assume thats the pay I would get if I get the GC. My current pay is 60K/year. I have approved I-140 and have also applied my I-485 in the July 2007 fiasco.
I am now heart broken since I am not sure if I would ever get the GC cause the wage mentioned in LC and what I am getting right now has huge difference.
What can I do at this point of time? Any suggestion would be helpful to me.
Thank you.
My PERM labor was filed in Dec 2006. I didn't know much about all the technicalities in that process. I found today, from the flcdatacenter website, my labor petition number and was shocked to see the wage mentioned in there is "50.34", "Hr". I assume thats the pay I would get if I get the GC. My current pay is 60K/year. I have approved I-140 and have also applied my I-485 in the July 2007 fiasco.
I am now heart broken since I am not sure if I would ever get the GC cause the wage mentioned in LC and what I am getting right now has huge difference.
What can I do at this point of time? Any suggestion would be helpful to me.
Thank you.
tattoo short hair styles for men 2011
mbawa2574
02-11 07:52 AM
i lostmy legal in 2002 (b2). during 2003 i won gc lottery . we did al paper work till last step.my lawyer toll me dont go couse deportation. In 2005 my employer apply gc for me (em3) In April 2006 I-140 aproved.now we waiting for priority date..
My question to you .. my lottery case priority date can be use for my eb3 case?
IV members don't support illegal Immigration. Since you were illegal from 2002 to 2003 and overstayed on your B2 visa, we cannot help you here. Please contact an immigration attorney.
My question to you .. my lottery case priority date can be use for my eb3 case?
IV members don't support illegal Immigration. Since you were illegal from 2002 to 2003 and overstayed on your B2 visa, we cannot help you here. Please contact an immigration attorney.
more...
pictures hairstyles 2011 men thick.
mr_aryan
10-19 01:50 PM
If the annonation says, you came to U.S for the liecensing exam & and you got any employment offer in correspondece to that after passing it.
I dont think it would be considered as a VISA fraud.
I dont think it would be considered as a VISA fraud.
dresses new hairstyles for men 2011.
SunnySurya
08-03 08:32 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
more...
makeup cool haircuts for men 2011.
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
girlfriend new hairstyles for men 2011.
Euclid
02-12 10:07 AM
Hi Ann,
Thanks so much!
Hi Euclid,
In my opinion, your situation clearly falls within the "receipt rule". The rec't for replacement of the lost EAD is good for up to 90 days. Below is an excerpt from the the most recent I-9 Handbook for Employers published by USCIS. This pretty clearly differentiates between a rec't for an initial or renewal application and a rec't for an application to replace a lost document.
Ann
Q When can employees present receipts for documents in lieu of actual documents establishing employment authorization?
A The �receipt rule� is designed to cover situations in which an employee is employment autho- rized at the time of initial hire or reverification, but he or she is not in possession of a document listed on page 5 of Form I-9. Receipts showing that a person has applied for an initial grant of employment authorization or for renewal of employment authorization are not acceptable.
An individual may present a receipt in lieu of a document listed on Form I-9 to complete Section 2 of Form I-9.The receipt is valid for a temporary period.There are three different documents that qualify as receipts under the rule:
32
1.
A receipt for a replacement document when the document has been lost, stolen, or damaged.The receipt is valid for 90 days, after which the individual must present the
replacement document to complete Form I-9.
Note: This rule does not apply to individuals who pres- ent receipts for new documents following the expiration of their previously held document.
Thanks so much!
Hi Euclid,
In my opinion, your situation clearly falls within the "receipt rule". The rec't for replacement of the lost EAD is good for up to 90 days. Below is an excerpt from the the most recent I-9 Handbook for Employers published by USCIS. This pretty clearly differentiates between a rec't for an initial or renewal application and a rec't for an application to replace a lost document.
Ann
Q When can employees present receipts for documents in lieu of actual documents establishing employment authorization?
A The �receipt rule� is designed to cover situations in which an employee is employment autho- rized at the time of initial hire or reverification, but he or she is not in possession of a document listed on page 5 of Form I-9. Receipts showing that a person has applied for an initial grant of employment authorization or for renewal of employment authorization are not acceptable.
An individual may present a receipt in lieu of a document listed on Form I-9 to complete Section 2 of Form I-9.The receipt is valid for a temporary period.There are three different documents that qualify as receipts under the rule:
32
1.
A receipt for a replacement document when the document has been lost, stolen, or damaged.The receipt is valid for 90 days, after which the individual must present the
replacement document to complete Form I-9.
Note: This rule does not apply to individuals who pres- ent receipts for new documents following the expiration of their previously held document.
hairstyles korean hairstyles for men 2011
BornConfused
07-03 10:21 AM
u talk like a kid in class II.
In the second grade you mean? And yet you're the one using "u" and in lower case letter. Chill and use your sense of humor if you have one.
In the second grade you mean? And yet you're the one using "u" and in lower case letter. Chill and use your sense of humor if you have one.
samuel5028
04-05 05:35 AM
If its illegal, then you have to consult an attrony.
needhelp!
12-31 12:15 PM
This year is going to be a memorable one.
No comments:
Post a Comment