werc
03-28 03:22 PM
So a person on H1B goes onto a H4 and wants to come back onto a H1B 3 months down the line. As per your statement , the person is subjected to the cap. Was that what you were implying ?
I think you were referring to this in the link.
b) Persons who have previously been counted against the H1B quota (a person would only be counted once against the cap unless s/he has a year outside the U.S., thereby resetting the clock on the six-year limit.)
I understand this to mean that aperson who has spent a year outside the US has 2 options.
1. To apply for a new H1 (subject to the cap)
2. To use the remainder of the 6 years he has from his prior H1B.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
If you don't have 1 year gap. otherwise you are subjected to.
I think you were referring to this in the link.
b) Persons who have previously been counted against the H1B quota (a person would only be counted once against the cap unless s/he has a year outside the U.S., thereby resetting the clock on the six-year limit.)
I understand this to mean that aperson who has spent a year outside the US has 2 options.
1. To apply for a new H1 (subject to the cap)
2. To use the remainder of the 6 years he has from his prior H1B.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
If you don't have 1 year gap. otherwise you are subjected to.
wallpaper Penguin Turquoise Wallpaper
GCHope2011
11-05 08:16 AM
Please read the editorial from today's WSJ by John Boehner. We should adjust our thinking to this reality and try to eat the elephant one bite at a time. Trying to swallow anything all at once is certainly not John Boehner's idea of legislation.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
Anders �stberg
March 4th, 2004, 02:07 AM
I don't think the spiral staircase shot ever gets old. Each one has its own characteristics and the varied tones and depths always make for interesting B&W shots. I'm sure it's a rare day that an office stairwell makes a good color shot. ;) I vote that you work the shot from every angle and show us what you came up with.
Gary
There's a least three different views, this one is from the top floor where the railing is different (no continuation upwards) from all other floors, and there's one possible view looking up from the bottom floor as well. I'll see what I can do... :)
Gary
There's a least three different views, this one is from the top floor where the railing is different (no continuation upwards) from all other floors, and there's one possible view looking up from the bottom floor as well. I'll see what I can do... :)
2011 she is turquoise
smuggymba
02-12 11:39 PM
Just don't use immigration expert chandler sharma from Atlanta because this immigration expert doesn't handle immigration matters once you pay a 100 dollar fee at the reception.
If you call to ask for an immigration expert to schedule an appointment, Mr Chandler sharma from Atlanta is the first and foremost person. When you go into this office, he says he deals in civil and business law....hahahhaha.
My worst 100 dollars spent ever.
If you call to ask for an immigration expert to schedule an appointment, Mr Chandler sharma from Atlanta is the first and foremost person. When you go into this office, he says he deals in civil and business law....hahahhaha.
My worst 100 dollars spent ever.
more...
kaisersose
07-17 10:22 AM
Folks,
Last month I called TSC and got a really nice IO. I was checking on my FBI name check status and he told me that he can get more details by A# instead of receipt NO. He in fact found my A# as i only had receipt number handy. He than told me that the FBI checks are cleared and my case is assigned to an IO.
Does case assigned to an IO means that when Visa nos are available i have chance to get GC? Does it mean it is adjudicated and waiting for visa NO?
EB2-I
PD: Jul 2004
I-140 approved
I-485: RD 02 Aug, 2007
You can answer this question for yourself if you read . The quick answer is, it does not mean anything. The system is totally random and trying to discern a pattern out of their actions is a futile exercise.
Last month I called TSC and got a really nice IO. I was checking on my FBI name check status and he told me that he can get more details by A# instead of receipt NO. He in fact found my A# as i only had receipt number handy. He than told me that the FBI checks are cleared and my case is assigned to an IO.
Does case assigned to an IO means that when Visa nos are available i have chance to get GC? Does it mean it is adjudicated and waiting for visa NO?
EB2-I
PD: Jul 2004
I-140 approved
I-485: RD 02 Aug, 2007
You can answer this question for yourself if you read . The quick answer is, it does not mean anything. The system is totally random and trying to discern a pattern out of their actions is a futile exercise.
eblues
09-05 06:06 PM
What is the reason your university cited for their position that you might be violating J status?
It is not the official position of my university. It is the opinion of the lady at the international office I spoke to, and actually all she did was warn me that flight training is kind of a delicate issue here in the US (and I can honestly see why) and that I should look into the matter carefully before proceeding.
Can the training you are seeking be construed as a professional training (even if you may choose to use it as a hobby)? I sort of recall that flight instruction schools could issue I-20, which would imply that those courses are considered professional courses. If that is the case, then you might indeed be violating your J status.
You're right, flight schools run all sorts of courses and from my research I know that they can issue the documentation required for M-1 visa (it used to be J-1s as well but that stopped in June 2009, if I remember correctly). I am just interested in sport flight training, which means that (even) if I get a flight license I won't be able to fly for compensation of any sort and I won't be able to perform any sort of aerial work. My flight experience could be regarded as professional training just like driving a car can be regarded useful for learning to drive a truck, though. In my opinion it is a bit far-fetched to affirm that this makes it 'professional training', otherwise most forms of training (even playing baseball with friends on Sunday afternoons) would count as professional. I hope this point makes sense :-)
On the other hand, if you can show that the course you will that cannot be used as a professional course, e.g., that course cannot fulfill credit requirements towards becoming an instructor, or a pilot who can fly cargo and/or passengers, then you should be alright.
Becoming an instructor, flying cargo and passengers for compensation all require more advanced licenses that all come with their courses and additional requirements (the "importance" sequence is -- more or less -- sport pilot -> private pilot -> commercial pilot -> airline transportation pilot). AFAIK flight hours logged as a sports pilot (not during training) can be made to count towards fulfilling the requirements for becoming a private pilot (and he cannot use his license to work as well, btw) but I'm not even trying to do that (and I can show it: if I wanted I'd have required a different kind of TSA clearance and medical certificate, I believe).
In any case thank you very, very much for your opinion. It's quite probably the first substantiated one I get for my case. This forum and its users rock.
Pierluigi
It is not the official position of my university. It is the opinion of the lady at the international office I spoke to, and actually all she did was warn me that flight training is kind of a delicate issue here in the US (and I can honestly see why) and that I should look into the matter carefully before proceeding.
Can the training you are seeking be construed as a professional training (even if you may choose to use it as a hobby)? I sort of recall that flight instruction schools could issue I-20, which would imply that those courses are considered professional courses. If that is the case, then you might indeed be violating your J status.
You're right, flight schools run all sorts of courses and from my research I know that they can issue the documentation required for M-1 visa (it used to be J-1s as well but that stopped in June 2009, if I remember correctly). I am just interested in sport flight training, which means that (even) if I get a flight license I won't be able to fly for compensation of any sort and I won't be able to perform any sort of aerial work. My flight experience could be regarded as professional training just like driving a car can be regarded useful for learning to drive a truck, though. In my opinion it is a bit far-fetched to affirm that this makes it 'professional training', otherwise most forms of training (even playing baseball with friends on Sunday afternoons) would count as professional. I hope this point makes sense :-)
On the other hand, if you can show that the course you will that cannot be used as a professional course, e.g., that course cannot fulfill credit requirements towards becoming an instructor, or a pilot who can fly cargo and/or passengers, then you should be alright.
Becoming an instructor, flying cargo and passengers for compensation all require more advanced licenses that all come with their courses and additional requirements (the "importance" sequence is -- more or less -- sport pilot -> private pilot -> commercial pilot -> airline transportation pilot). AFAIK flight hours logged as a sports pilot (not during training) can be made to count towards fulfilling the requirements for becoming a private pilot (and he cannot use his license to work as well, btw) but I'm not even trying to do that (and I can show it: if I wanted I'd have required a different kind of TSA clearance and medical certificate, I believe).
In any case thank you very, very much for your opinion. It's quite probably the first substantiated one I get for my case. This forum and its users rock.
Pierluigi
more...
GCKaMaara
04-07 04:52 PM
I am planning to go on a Hawaii cruise on the Norwegian Cruise line ship (Pride of America) which is registered in the US. My H1-B visa has expired but my I-94 is valid. The Cruise ship only visits islands in Hawaii and embarks/disembarks in Hawaii.
Do I need to worry about my visa stamping or just the Passport with valid I-94 and drivers license should suffice?
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Call me stupid but I thought Hawaii is part of US only.
Do I need to worry about my visa stamping or just the Passport with valid I-94 and drivers license should suffice?
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Call me stupid but I thought Hawaii is part of US only.
2010 Turquoise Wallpaper by
bsbawa10
08-14 10:50 PM
The spreadsheet is totally sorted now according to the PD. I had to make one change though. The day of the month of PD was not mentioned and I had to write something to sort it out. I made it 1st of the month for everybody to be able to so sorting. You can change the day if you want to. Also please do not sort the data yourself. I will do it periodically. Just enter your info at the end.
Bawa
Bawa
more...
xgoogle
06-24 11:08 AM
Thanks you guys and smart move admin for collapsing both the threads together! I was only hoping if one of the lawyers could also confirm on this, then I would be really confident going forward with this decision.
Thanks a bunch again for listening to my rant!
Thanks a bunch again for listening to my rant!
hair The wallpaper and fabric are
10dulkar
02-28 07:18 AM
Per RFE for I485 they want the proof of Employment Authorization in US starting 12th April 2004 to present.
I was going thru my all the I-797 approvals for myself and I found that there is a discontinuity in one of the old approval notice.
WAC-01-XXX-XXXXX 07/15/2001 - 04/05/2004
WAC-04- XXX-XXXXX 04/30/2004 - 01/18/2005 (This approval start after 25 days)
But the extension petition was filed prior to expiration of WAC-01-XXX-XXXXX on 17th Dec. 2003. Approval notice has the receive date of 17th Dec 2003.
Could this gap be a issue, That is why they are asking starting 12th April 2004?
Per my Lawyer, no need to worry because the extension petition was filed before the expiration of other.
Please advice.
VS
what is your PD, catagory and country please?
I was going thru my all the I-797 approvals for myself and I found that there is a discontinuity in one of the old approval notice.
WAC-01-XXX-XXXXX 07/15/2001 - 04/05/2004
WAC-04- XXX-XXXXX 04/30/2004 - 01/18/2005 (This approval start after 25 days)
But the extension petition was filed prior to expiration of WAC-01-XXX-XXXXX on 17th Dec. 2003. Approval notice has the receive date of 17th Dec 2003.
Could this gap be a issue, That is why they are asking starting 12th April 2004?
Per my Lawyer, no need to worry because the extension petition was filed before the expiration of other.
Please advice.
VS
what is your PD, catagory and country please?
more...
rtarar
02-12 07:21 AM
I am a july 2 nd filer.
No FP yet.
No FP yet.
hot Wallpaper - Turquoise sea
ak27
08-15 11:10 AM
Hello,
I have filed for conversion and have been waiting since march 28th. It has been over 4 months and I am yet to hear anything. If you work for large organization then Atterney is going to scare you about possible fallout from denial. My Atterney did scare me but my job description remained exactly same so I am confident case will not be denied. However, it is painful wait but it may be worth it if there is going to be any retro relief in near future. I will post as and when I hear about my case.
I have filed for conversion and have been waiting since march 28th. It has been over 4 months and I am yet to hear anything. If you work for large organization then Atterney is going to scare you about possible fallout from denial. My Atterney did scare me but my job description remained exactly same so I am confident case will not be denied. However, it is painful wait but it may be worth it if there is going to be any retro relief in near future. I will post as and when I hear about my case.
more...
house turquoise background
centrum
09-27 04:36 PM
Important Visa and Immigration Documents (http://www.upenn.edu/oip/iss/visa/documents.html)
Is the statement under passport true? I still shouldn't have any problem right?
Is the statement under passport true? I still shouldn't have any problem right?
tattoo Floral Wallpaper Collection by
iv_newbie_2007
09-15 11:38 PM
Hi,
My wife has an approved H1 w/ COS starting from Oct 1. Her current status is H4. She wants to continue to maintain her H4 status, so we want to to file for reinstatement of H4 before Oct 1.
How long does it take for USCIS to approve H4 reinstatement?
Thanks!
My wife has an approved H1 w/ COS starting from Oct 1. Her current status is H4. She wants to continue to maintain her H4 status, so we want to to file for reinstatement of H4 before Oct 1.
How long does it take for USCIS to approve H4 reinstatement?
Thanks!
more...
pictures Turquoise and Brown Bella Collection Wall Paper Borders will help complete
ras
05-28 01:57 PM
If the fee is reduced then it will have impact on the number of personnel that USCIS can employ which inturn delays the whole application process. So rather with the fee let the USCIS have enough personnel to dispose of the cases.
And of course as mentioned above it is good idea that the attorneys take less fee so the burden is less on the applicant. And may be USCIS could simplify and come up with application procedures such that there is not much of an attorney intervention to comply with the law.
And of course as mentioned above it is good idea that the attorneys take less fee so the burden is less on the applicant. And may be USCIS could simplify and come up with application procedures such that there is not much of an attorney intervention to comply with the law.
dresses Thibaut Wallpaper Pattern:
FinalGC
10-24 11:19 AM
I had applied for a ITIN for my parents about 4 years ago and I was able to claim them as dependents since they stayed in US for more than 90 days and additionally I was supporting their welfare and expenses. IRS did accept my application, but I can do this only in the year they are physically here.
Check Pub 501 page 14 onwards....the key is you need an ITIN # for them....also see page 19, where it says non-resident parents can apply for ITIN, if not eligible for SSN
I have couple of friends who have claimed like this....
if this is the first time you are applying, then you will need to file a paper copy of your taxes and send to IRS Phily and then they will process your taxes for next year....
Check Pub 501 page 14 onwards....the key is you need an ITIN # for them....also see page 19, where it says non-resident parents can apply for ITIN, if not eligible for SSN
I have couple of friends who have claimed like this....
if this is the first time you are applying, then you will need to file a paper copy of your taxes and send to IRS Phily and then they will process your taxes for next year....
more...
makeup Turquoise seamless wallpaper
chintu25
01-15 11:01 PM
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111HC0fZW:e35939:
NICE
NICE
girlfriend turquoise wallpaper
GreenCard4US
08-21 12:25 PM
I received an RFE from USCIS 10 days after the date on the letter and need to respond in 33 days.
I came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006. This Company A had applied for my labor and I140 and both of them were approved through them. I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. I joined Company C in April 2007(change of H1) and been with them since. Company C would not do my GC.
During the July 2007 fiasco, Company A agreed to give me an offer letter that I submitted with my 485 application and my attorney (a good reputed one) mentioned in the application that I was working for company C.
I got an RFE now stating that I did not send my sealed medical exam which I had done and we have a scan of what was sent. They also want �a current letter of employment attesting to your offer of proposed employment. This letter should be written on the company�s official letterhead and cite the date you will begin working, whether the position is temporary or permanent , a description of the position, a description of the position that you currently hold for the company (if any), and offered salary�
Is this RFE bad? What might have triggered this RFW? Now my attorney suggests that since I had filed 485 through company A and I did not really invoke AC21 that I should give a new offer letter from Company A (they are willing to give one). My question is if I do that will there be further questions? The company I work for is a bigger one and Company A is really a body shopper, so I want to go with the letter from the current company. Also since it more than 2 years since I applied for 485 can I say I invoked AC 21? When can I disassociate myself from company A as I do not want to lose my current job.
I would like the attorneys or the members valuable help. Please do offer your opinions. Thank you all in advance.
__________________
I came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006. This Company A had applied for my labor and I140 and both of them were approved through them. I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. I joined Company C in April 2007(change of H1) and been with them since. Company C would not do my GC.
During the July 2007 fiasco, Company A agreed to give me an offer letter that I submitted with my 485 application and my attorney (a good reputed one) mentioned in the application that I was working for company C.
I got an RFE now stating that I did not send my sealed medical exam which I had done and we have a scan of what was sent. They also want �a current letter of employment attesting to your offer of proposed employment. This letter should be written on the company�s official letterhead and cite the date you will begin working, whether the position is temporary or permanent , a description of the position, a description of the position that you currently hold for the company (if any), and offered salary�
Is this RFE bad? What might have triggered this RFW? Now my attorney suggests that since I had filed 485 through company A and I did not really invoke AC21 that I should give a new offer letter from Company A (they are willing to give one). My question is if I do that will there be further questions? The company I work for is a bigger one and Company A is really a body shopper, so I want to go with the letter from the current company. Also since it more than 2 years since I applied for 485 can I say I invoked AC 21? When can I disassociate myself from company A as I do not want to lose my current job.
I would like the attorneys or the members valuable help. Please do offer your opinions. Thank you all in advance.
__________________
hairstyles Tivoli Turquoise wallpaper
santb1975
05-15 07:53 PM
Let's not lose momentum here
some_guy
07-17 05:37 PM
Great news...... Keep going IV
ameryki
08-12 12:34 PM
Efiled for my wife May 17th to NSC got LIN number. No update so far. Next week will be 90 days.
No comments:
Post a Comment