cool_guy_onnet1
06-01 01:28 PM
New Immigration Bill Amendment Could Help Keep Foreign Tech Workers In U.S.
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
wallpaper /05/2009-dodge-caliber-sxt
nlssubbu
12-08 12:17 PM
Her H4 is not valid. She did travel to India without an approved AP.
Can we cancel her GC application and bring her back on H4?
Any other options?
Why don't you take info pass and explain the need for an emergency visit and get an interim AP?
Thanks
Can we cancel her GC application and bring her back on H4?
Any other options?
Why don't you take info pass and explain the need for an emergency visit and get an interim AP?
Thanks
paskal
08-22 03:02 PM
This sound like a good idea...our first option is to attend the rally. But if for some reason we are not able to make it...we can identify a place in all the states on the same day to show support for the DC rally.. I tried to find someone in Buffalo...but noone responded..dont know whether I will be able to attend the rally in DC.
if no one responds here, please find a friend in Buffalo to travel with you!
or in Rochester or Syracuse or something. Plesae help spread the word about the rally. The University most definitely has affected folks- in fact it has oodles of them! let us know hoe we can help you with motivating people to come...if you could collect enough people...one bus could start in Buffalo and work it's way down...
if no one responds here, please find a friend in Buffalo to travel with you!
or in Rochester or Syracuse or something. Plesae help spread the word about the rally. The University most definitely has affected folks- in fact it has oodles of them! let us know hoe we can help you with motivating people to come...if you could collect enough people...one bus could start in Buffalo and work it's way down...
2011 Caliber 1,8 SXT
Raji
09-16 10:20 PM
Done!!!
more...
file485
04-10 07:29 PM
wellwishergc..
looks like u have some more knowledge in these matters. My ex employer got a 45day letter filed in Oct2003 EB2 case. they replied to go ahead with the case. When the labor approves and in a scenario, that employer has no project at the point of time to hire me back, can he file my 140 and then the 485...??
That employer is not a consulting company and thus needs a position for me and is a big-big company. If I request them they will file the 140, but will taht be okay if I am not working at that time...??
thx
looks like u have some more knowledge in these matters. My ex employer got a 45day letter filed in Oct2003 EB2 case. they replied to go ahead with the case. When the labor approves and in a scenario, that employer has no project at the point of time to hire me back, can he file my 140 and then the 485...??
That employer is not a consulting company and thus needs a position for me and is a big-big company. If I request them they will file the 140, but will taht be okay if I am not working at that time...??
thx
eastindia
08-20 12:06 PM
Ron says, The USCIS teleconference concerning implementation of PL 111-230 provided the following information:
* The effective date of the new law was August 14, 2010 and all petition submissions postmarked on or after that date are subject to the new tax.
* The new tax only applies to companies that have:
o 50 or more full and part time employees in the US; and
o At least 50% of those employees hold H1B or L status.
* If an employee has an EAD, but is working using an H1B, that employee counts toward the total. If the employee works using his or her EAD, however, the employee does not count.
* The new tax only applies to new H filings (including change of employer filings)
* The new tax DOES NOT apply to extensions or amendments
* The total new tax is $2,000, not the higher amount originally feared
* The CIS confirmed that the additional fee must be paid by the petitioner and not the employee
* Both full and part time employees count toward the 50 employee threshold
* Any L2 employees, working using an EAD, also count toward the total
* The CIS is in the process of developing a new I-129 form to capture information concerning the new fee
* The CSC and VSC are attempting to screen existing cases, with filing postmarks on or after August 14th. For those that are found likely to be subject to the new tax, they will issue RFEs
* DO NOT send checks to the CIS for the additional fee until you receive an RFE.
* New filings by exempt companies should include a signed attestation that they are not subject to the new tax.
* Best practice, use a separate check for the new fee.
* The effective date of the new law was August 14, 2010 and all petition submissions postmarked on or after that date are subject to the new tax.
* The new tax only applies to companies that have:
o 50 or more full and part time employees in the US; and
o At least 50% of those employees hold H1B or L status.
* If an employee has an EAD, but is working using an H1B, that employee counts toward the total. If the employee works using his or her EAD, however, the employee does not count.
* The new tax only applies to new H filings (including change of employer filings)
* The new tax DOES NOT apply to extensions or amendments
* The total new tax is $2,000, not the higher amount originally feared
* The CIS confirmed that the additional fee must be paid by the petitioner and not the employee
* Both full and part time employees count toward the 50 employee threshold
* Any L2 employees, working using an EAD, also count toward the total
* The CIS is in the process of developing a new I-129 form to capture information concerning the new fee
* The CSC and VSC are attempting to screen existing cases, with filing postmarks on or after August 14th. For those that are found likely to be subject to the new tax, they will issue RFEs
* DO NOT send checks to the CIS for the additional fee until you receive an RFE.
* New filings by exempt companies should include a signed attestation that they are not subject to the new tax.
* Best practice, use a separate check for the new fee.
more...
gc_chahiye
11-13 12:13 PM
I would appreciate if any of you could shed light on the following scenario:
If 485 is pending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
you will need to come back to atleast get AP approvals (AP expires every year), and if you are served a fingerprint notice, then come back for that. If you are going to be definately out for the next few years, another option is to do consular processing; talk to a lawyer it depends a lot on your specific case.
If 485 is pending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
you will need to come back to atleast get AP approvals (AP expires every year), and if you are served a fingerprint notice, then come back for that. If you are going to be definately out for the next few years, another option is to do consular processing; talk to a lawyer it depends a lot on your specific case.
2010 2008 Dodge Caliber SXT
vin13
09-30 01:10 PM
Any idea what these LUDs may be which you had
LUD on 09/22, 09/23 ,09/29 and 09/30.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
No idea...these were just soft LUD....the last updated date was changed online.
LUD on 09/22, 09/23 ,09/29 and 09/30.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
No idea...these were just soft LUD....the last updated date was changed online.
more...
vikki76
07-05 03:05 PM
I-140 can not be ported. You need to start all over again at your new company with new PERM labor and new I-140.
However, if you have a copy of old approved I-140, you can use that to port older priority date at the time of 485 filing.Companies usually don't give copies of I-140.
However, if you have a copy of old approved I-140, you can use that to port older priority date at the time of 485 filing.Companies usually don't give copies of I-140.
hair 2007 Dodge Caliber SXT Wagon
caforum2
04-06 10:10 PM
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
If you go toImmigration-law update time clearly says 3PM EST and IV postings are around 9.30PM EST ...so what have to be correct? the one which is posted at 3PM or 9.30 PM. You decide. Before asking same question in different place do some homework.
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
If you go toImmigration-law update time clearly says 3PM EST and IV postings are around 9.30PM EST ...so what have to be correct? the one which is posted at 3PM or 9.30 PM. You decide. Before asking same question in different place do some homework.
more...
eastindia
09-23 10:58 AM
It’s not India or China who asked for globalization. It was America who wants to sell their products throughout the world.
No matter how many bills these Senators may make they are not going to stop outsourcing.
America didn’t develop because of protectionist policies, it grow because it was a free market.
In today's world it is simply not possible to stop outsourcing. It is also not possible to stop all illegal immigration or send all legal/illegal immigrats out. Anti-immigrants are very few in number and they try to project as if the entire America wants what they want. They will still go and buy a Toyota and buy stuff Made in China from the store :) Ask them if they want double for their grocery every week if we deport all undocumented and their answer will definitely be a NO.
No matter how many bills these Senators may make they are not going to stop outsourcing.
America didn’t develop because of protectionist policies, it grow because it was a free market.
In today's world it is simply not possible to stop outsourcing. It is also not possible to stop all illegal immigration or send all legal/illegal immigrats out. Anti-immigrants are very few in number and they try to project as if the entire America wants what they want. They will still go and buy a Toyota and buy stuff Made in China from the store :) Ask them if they want double for their grocery every week if we deport all undocumented and their answer will definitely be a NO.
hot 2008 Dodge Caliber SXT
srikanthmavurapu
08-16 04:03 PM
It all depends if you have a written agreement that prohibits you from working with the current employer. If there is no contract, you are safe. It seems that there is no such contract that either you signed with your ex-employer or middle-men.
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
In the Employee Agreement which i signed there is clause saying i cannot work for the same client directly or indirectly for one year . I don't think i signed any contract with ex-employer or middle men. I don't even have the copy of contract document(purchase order) when i got this job offer at this client.
I will complain to DOL just thinking to talk to a Lawyer first but i will complain to DOL this week at any cost.
Thanks,
Srikanth
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
In the Employee Agreement which i signed there is clause saying i cannot work for the same client directly or indirectly for one year . I don't think i signed any contract with ex-employer or middle men. I don't even have the copy of contract document(purchase order) when i got this job offer at this client.
I will complain to DOL just thinking to talk to a Lawyer first but i will complain to DOL this week at any cost.
Thanks,
Srikanth
more...
house 2009 Dodge Caliber SXT Data,
belmontboy
04-10 06:56 PM
There should be tighter provisions against multiple applications [via multiple employers]. it prone to abuse - as a way to increase chances of lottery [as it happened this yr].
There is no real justification in multiple applications - though one might argue otherwise. In the end, the candidate has to work for only one employer.
Interesting stats would be how many mulitple employers applications were filed per candidate, not sure if uscis publishes them!
There is no real justification in multiple applications - though one might argue otherwise. In the end, the candidate has to work for only one employer.
Interesting stats would be how many mulitple employers applications were filed per candidate, not sure if uscis publishes them!
tattoo 2009 Dodge Caliber SXT
shan74
01-15 10:24 PM
Hi Bhanupriya,
Couple of questions:
Did you directly requested 140 and labor documents in the form, or what was ur statement to request the documents.
Also what are the documents u need to send along with the G639 form. Also if you can mention what to fill in each section that will be of great help.
thanks
Couple of questions:
Did you directly requested 140 and labor documents in the form, or what was ur statement to request the documents.
Also what are the documents u need to send along with the G639 form. Also if you can mention what to fill in each section that will be of great help.
thanks
more...
pictures Dodge Caliber SXT. basic info
walking_dude
09-07 01:08 PM
IV Core,
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
dresses Dodge Calibre SXT.
gc_check
04-12 03:32 PM
Two Days Left for Submission of Comments to DOL on Substitution Elimination Proposed Rule....
IV Members, what do you folks think?
I suggest elimination of labour substitution is good for many of us and also help avoid people getting into the GC line in front of many people waiting for years, Many companies and attorney's suggest the labour substituion must be allowed, but I think the opposite... Any comments on this
IV Members, what do you folks think?
I suggest elimination of labour substitution is good for many of us and also help avoid people getting into the GC line in front of many people waiting for years, Many companies and attorney's suggest the labour substituion must be allowed, but I think the opposite... Any comments on this
more...
makeup 2007 Dodge Caliber SXT Sedan
ajcates
11-24 11:28 AM
I want the kawoosh one to win mainly because of the cool name.
girlfriend 2008 Dodge Caliber Overview
seahawks
07-19 08:32 PM
I work in CA, my I140 is approved from NSC.
But the lawyer sent the 485 to TSC.
I just went over the I-485 form and it clearly says to send the I-485 employment based applications to NSC
Employment-based adjustment of status.
File all employment-based adjustment of statusapplications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service CenterP.O. Box 87485Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
Did my lawyer screw up?
No, there are two theories, usually if your I-140 was approved from TSC, then 485 gets filed there. Most of the 485's got to Texas these days. Now if it was send in any of them, they usually forward it to the right center.
I am from WA, mine I-140 was filed in TSC and so was my 485. They have different clauses like if you file concurrently, if your I-140 was approved and soo on.. so what is given online is not very clear. Don't worry, things will be fine. If you feel you are confused, always call USCIS and they will provide you the input.
Not an attorney, just an observation and reading. I know lot of people filed in NSC and they got forwarded by NSC to TSC!
But the lawyer sent the 485 to TSC.
I just went over the I-485 form and it clearly says to send the I-485 employment based applications to NSC
Employment-based adjustment of status.
File all employment-based adjustment of statusapplications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service CenterP.O. Box 87485Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
Did my lawyer screw up?
No, there are two theories, usually if your I-140 was approved from TSC, then 485 gets filed there. Most of the 485's got to Texas these days. Now if it was send in any of them, they usually forward it to the right center.
I am from WA, mine I-140 was filed in TSC and so was my 485. They have different clauses like if you file concurrently, if your I-140 was approved and soo on.. so what is given online is not very clear. Don't worry, things will be fine. If you feel you are confused, always call USCIS and they will provide you the input.
Not an attorney, just an observation and reading. I know lot of people filed in NSC and they got forwarded by NSC to TSC!
hairstyles 2010 Dodge Caliber SXT Gold
123456mg
07-20 03:32 AM
Immigration attorneys normally send more than required documents to avoid getting RFEs later on. In this case, the reason people send W-2s (though it is not mandated) and tax returns is to show that you were working and were making approximately equal amount that was mentioned on you H-1B LCA.
Asking for W-2 or tax returns are within the powers of AOS adjudicator and s/he can raise an RFE for such "discretionary evidence".
The tax returns prove that you did not have any other source of income (that directly contradicts your H-1B compliance) and thus you were not employed on another part-time job or any other business of that fashion and complied to the terms of H-1B rules.
There are various factors to consider here:
1. If you know that your H-1B LCA had substantially higher amount and you did not make that much (cause you were on bench or any other reason), it would be far better not to send it. By sending your W-2 in such case, you are actually weakening your case and the AOS officer is going to find it out and will have RFE for it and later you will have a lot of explaining to do. Also, if you had any other form(s) of income (like some people use to make money in day trading and that forms their additional income), it will be wiser not to send your income tax returns and create additonal issues.
2. If you know that you made almost similar amount as mentioned on your H-1B LCA, then you will have to send all W-2 and income tax statements from the time when you were last inspected or paroled by the US immigration officer. Do not give anymore than what is really required of you. By giving unnecessorily more information, you may cause additional issues later on.
Asking for W-2 or tax returns are within the powers of AOS adjudicator and s/he can raise an RFE for such "discretionary evidence".
The tax returns prove that you did not have any other source of income (that directly contradicts your H-1B compliance) and thus you were not employed on another part-time job or any other business of that fashion and complied to the terms of H-1B rules.
There are various factors to consider here:
1. If you know that your H-1B LCA had substantially higher amount and you did not make that much (cause you were on bench or any other reason), it would be far better not to send it. By sending your W-2 in such case, you are actually weakening your case and the AOS officer is going to find it out and will have RFE for it and later you will have a lot of explaining to do. Also, if you had any other form(s) of income (like some people use to make money in day trading and that forms their additional income), it will be wiser not to send your income tax returns and create additonal issues.
2. If you know that you made almost similar amount as mentioned on your H-1B LCA, then you will have to send all W-2 and income tax statements from the time when you were last inspected or paroled by the US immigration officer. Do not give anymore than what is really required of you. By giving unnecessorily more information, you may cause additional issues later on.
lskreddy
08-22 03:48 PM
Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP - San Francisco - just Google them....you should be able to find contact information. They've treated me wonderfully!!
Were you kidding or serious? You just quoted the very same name that guy is to avoid.
Fragomen is the only part missing in the name you mentioned. I hope the other three didn't ditch Fragomen to start DBL..
Were you kidding or serious? You just quoted the very same name that guy is to avoid.
Fragomen is the only part missing in the name you mentioned. I hope the other three didn't ditch Fragomen to start DBL..
zerozerozeven
04-10 03:29 PM
163,000 applns for general and more than 31,200 applns for advanced degree.
No comments:
Post a Comment