anilsal
07-16 12:37 PM
have posted info on this campaign to their chapters. I am sure this high-five campaign will be a great success. Keep the fire on.
wallpaper tribal wave tattoo. cool
desi3933
07-06 11:38 AM
may look big..... but if you check many thousands of these users were created during June-July2007 timing..... lots of people filed their GC and never came back to the site......
Only way to get the active member count is to send them email by admin and let IV member reply back. This is only for IV member who has not logged in last 3 months.
Otherwise, all we know is how many people signed up so far. Nothing more.
.
Only way to get the active member count is to send them email by admin and let IV member reply back. This is only for IV member who has not logged in last 3 months.
Otherwise, all we know is how many people signed up so far. Nothing more.
.
StarSun
05-07 10:22 AM
Please call the Senator offices repeatedly and ask your friends to call the senators too. This is very important for CIR.
We are making a difference.........
We are making a difference.........
2011 japanese artwork geisha
ab_tak_chappan
08-15 08:53 PM
do u expect people to stick around even they get their GC? come on dude.. once anyone gets a GC they start working towards their next target. I don't see anything wrong in it:D:D
True, once the people realize that they are close to GC they forget all tasks and move on to the other forums (R2I or USC or whatever) there are very few who actually stay on and help add this to the fact that most of the EB3-I's got fed up with the nonsense going on (most were only looking for a sounding board to voice their dismay, instead they were reminded of the caste system). So EB2's stop working because their PD is current and EBs stop because there is little hope/chance/help. We can dissect the VB as much as we want, the fact of the matter is that EB3 as a whole and EB3 (india &China) in particular are screwed big time. There is hope in the Logfren bills but the congress seems to have other 'important' issues to discuss.
We should take the campaign to a new level move from individuals to involving groups and compaines. They have more money and power to make things move. EB3 & EB2 discussions will go on for ever, we can either decide to wallow in our sorrow or do something. Lets identify groups who can help us and write to them. Each EB should talk to his/her HR and ask them to write a letter to their congressman/Senator it will have a bigger impact.
What are your thoughts?
True, once the people realize that they are close to GC they forget all tasks and move on to the other forums (R2I or USC or whatever) there are very few who actually stay on and help add this to the fact that most of the EB3-I's got fed up with the nonsense going on (most were only looking for a sounding board to voice their dismay, instead they were reminded of the caste system). So EB2's stop working because their PD is current and EBs stop because there is little hope/chance/help. We can dissect the VB as much as we want, the fact of the matter is that EB3 as a whole and EB3 (india &China) in particular are screwed big time. There is hope in the Logfren bills but the congress seems to have other 'important' issues to discuss.
We should take the campaign to a new level move from individuals to involving groups and compaines. They have more money and power to make things move. EB3 & EB2 discussions will go on for ever, we can either decide to wallow in our sorrow or do something. Lets identify groups who can help us and write to them. Each EB should talk to his/her HR and ask them to write a letter to their congressman/Senator it will have a bigger impact.
What are your thoughts?
more...
sansas
02-27 11:55 AM
Dreaming on the April Visa Bulletin in the US
How about placing a fast forward button and soon you will realized that the US Immigration DOS will issue a spectacular Visa Bulletin for April 2009. See the results of the said bulletin. The Employment base Visas will be current except China. So how did the USCIS allocate these number of Visas, for sure Obama had precedent a recapture except China.
http://nursepod.com/blog/?p=168
How about placing a fast forward button and soon you will realized that the US Immigration DOS will issue a spectacular Visa Bulletin for April 2009. See the results of the said bulletin. The Employment base Visas will be current except China. So how did the USCIS allocate these number of Visas, for sure Obama had precedent a recapture except China.
http://nursepod.com/blog/?p=168
rcahk
04-05 09:00 PM
My PD Oct 2001. 45 letter received October 2005. No news at Apr.5 2006:o
more...
freakin_gc
12-15 07:16 PM
diptam : Whether your I-140 is approved now?
I've sent 7001 to Ombudsman , Contacted Congressional offices and ultimately filed a Service request in Nov 1st week. After all this NSC opened my case yesterday Dec 9th and the status changed to "RFE sent" - there you go ! They bought at least 2 months extra time.
What a bunch of jokers at NSC - my case was extremely straight forward :(
I've sent 7001 to Ombudsman , Contacted Congressional offices and ultimately filed a Service request in Nov 1st week. After all this NSC opened my case yesterday Dec 9th and the status changed to "RFE sent" - there you go ! They bought at least 2 months extra time.
What a bunch of jokers at NSC - my case was extremely straight forward :(
2010 Koi, Water, Flower tattoo
ashutrip
06-21 01:16 PM
Link to post at IV (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=86268&postcount=5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
more...
GOTGC
07-25 07:56 AM
We applied in Nebraska in August 2003, Cleared in State on August 29th 2003, Transferred to Chicago DOL on Sept 1st 2003..Got Certfied on Oct 16th 2003...So yes..in some states Labor was VERY Quick.
hair japanese wave tattoos.
reachag
12-18 03:35 PM
Clarification - i meant Senior Member based on seniority on this Site and not based on age :). This idea has been brain stormed many times in the past and ruled out by many as it is not in our best interests and also not workable. Members who have been visting this site for some time would know and hence the comment about Seniority :)
Agreed, my thoughts on this are different from yours. Good..not every one thinks the same otherwise we would be short of ideas :)
first, I don't know what you mean by "Senior Member like you coming up with this idea". Seniority on this site I think is determined by how long a member has been registered. Second, even if it means older members, what does age have to do with this idea?
I have already said that most IV members (clearly you are one) are opposed to this.
My thoughts happen to be different from yours, and I dont plan on changing my ideas anytime soon.
Of course for this to work there has to be a signficant number of participants, otherwise actually nothing is going to work. And even with significant participation, there are no guarantees: look at how many people called Sen Sessions, but still made no difference.
Last, dont you guys get vacation?? Who is talking abut losing money? If you are paid hourly then dont take part.
and if you dont agree you dont need me to tell you dont be a part of this.
But, as mentioned many, many, many times before, I am for this idea, or something that gets attention in a big way.
Agreed, my thoughts on this are different from yours. Good..not every one thinks the same otherwise we would be short of ideas :)
first, I don't know what you mean by "Senior Member like you coming up with this idea". Seniority on this site I think is determined by how long a member has been registered. Second, even if it means older members, what does age have to do with this idea?
I have already said that most IV members (clearly you are one) are opposed to this.
My thoughts happen to be different from yours, and I dont plan on changing my ideas anytime soon.
Of course for this to work there has to be a signficant number of participants, otherwise actually nothing is going to work. And even with significant participation, there are no guarantees: look at how many people called Sen Sessions, but still made no difference.
Last, dont you guys get vacation?? Who is talking abut losing money? If you are paid hourly then dont take part.
and if you dont agree you dont need me to tell you dont be a part of this.
But, as mentioned many, many, many times before, I am for this idea, or something that gets attention in a big way.
more...
Libra
09-10 04:56 PM
thank you, 21k more....com' on we can do this.
Contributed $100 via Google checkout.
Contributed $100 via Google checkout.
hot Stretch - Skull Wave Study
raj3078
09-28 06:48 PM
This is just Sad.....
more...
house japanese wave tattoos. tribal
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
tattoo wave tattoo.
gk_2000
08-23 02:45 PM
How about people are using it as a loop hole and smack you down. Just because you have the option, it does not mean the right thing.
It is not the right thing -- from your perspective, because you can't take advantage of it. From the USA point of view multinational executives can potentially create jobs and that's why they must be allowed
You may call it "loophole", based on your understanding of it. However the reality may be different and larger than what you see. So don't axe the branch you are sitting on!
It is not the right thing -- from your perspective, because you can't take advantage of it. From the USA point of view multinational executives can potentially create jobs and that's why they must be allowed
You may call it "loophole", based on your understanding of it. However the reality may be different and larger than what you see. So don't axe the branch you are sitting on!
more...
pictures japanese waves tattoo.
Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
10-23 12:34 AM
Something's going on in the Senate....recapture of unused visa is proposed as an amendment to labor and healthcare appopriations bill.....let's see what happens tomorrow...expect that it will be tackled tomorrow!
They are proposing to recapture 61,000 unused visa for Schedule A. Keep praying everyone!
They are proposing to recapture 61,000 unused visa for Schedule A. Keep praying everyone!
dresses wave tattoo. japanese waves
kartikiran
12-10 04:11 PM
Good they have seem to have read recently published IV analysis and recommendations and provided a much more detailed bulletin this month for the community.
agreed. kudos to IV core to push for more detailed explanations without which proposals for fixing this backlog also becomes difficult.
agreed. kudos to IV core to push for more detailed explanations without which proposals for fixing this backlog also becomes difficult.
more...
makeup japanese wave tattoos
Keeme
03-06 05:57 PM
To keep the HOPE high;) One more point to consider , remember a month back there was a information going around on the # of Cards ordered by USCIS? Man, all these crazy things going around with
a) LUDs
b) Name Check 180 days rule
c) # of Cards ordered etc etc., etc., is making ppl. more anxious.....
Agree. I still blame name check 180 rule - a major decision by USCIS/FBI helped this backlogg to go from bad to worst.
Name check 180 rule -it allowed thousands of people from EB1 / EB2 Row to get their 485 cleared and consumed major chunk of 2008/09 EB visas. Had it been not there, many old timers, would have used visas as their Name check would have been cleared before them.
a) LUDs
b) Name Check 180 days rule
c) # of Cards ordered etc etc., etc., is making ppl. more anxious.....
Agree. I still blame name check 180 rule - a major decision by USCIS/FBI helped this backlogg to go from bad to worst.
Name check 180 rule -it allowed thousands of people from EB1 / EB2 Row to get their 485 cleared and consumed major chunk of 2008/09 EB visas. Had it been not there, many old timers, would have used visas as their Name check would have been cleared before them.
girlfriend dragon tattoo artwork
CADude
07-18 04:16 PM
priti8888, What is the USCIS 485 processing date in your senario?
Your Receive Date is a factor but PD is also a big factor, if limited number available.
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
Your Receive Date is a factor but PD is also a big factor, if limited number available.
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
hairstyles japanese wave tattoos.
Macaca
10-01 04:44 PM
Canot DOL/ UCIS make a judgement based on their own ?
You don't want USCIS to make any judgement. Here is an example of their judgement.
USCIS said that 140K EB #s were used on July 2. However, we are hearing that they did not use up the numbers on Sep 30.
You don't want USCIS to make any judgement. Here is an example of their judgement.
USCIS said that 140K EB #s were used on July 2. However, we are hearing that they did not use up the numbers on Sep 30.
needhelp!
07-15 01:57 PM
Thanks for your participation:
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
anujcb
03-09 10:47 AM
indio, which title are they ralking abt? right now?
No comments:
Post a Comment