reddymjm
06-13 06:51 PM
You should see the paper copy of receipts in your mail box today as I already got mine monday.Still waiting on my wifes. Was your at NSC too.. I wrote my name on the checks to differentiate. So I knew they were mine.
My attorney is not organized man. he is #$$%%%^. so worried whether he sent it or not. Is your wife working too by any chance.
I wrote the amount in words wrong, the numerics were right. so they returned my wifes application. I will resend it tomorrow.
My attorney is not organized man. he is #$$%%%^. so worried whether he sent it or not. Is your wife working too by any chance.
I wrote the amount in words wrong, the numerics were right. so they returned my wifes application. I will resend it tomorrow.
wallpaper hairstyles for round faces
snvlgopal
02-12 05:17 PM
sent $30
Unique Transaction ID #5D433679KU7906510
Unique Transaction ID #5D433679KU7906510
marlon2006
06-21 11:36 PM
Wait until November for Democrats to gain control ?
I am sorry, but that is the opposite of what 4 recent elections have shown. In spite of Republicans bad reputation, the American people seem to have replaced incumbents based on their position on illegal immigration/amnesty, not necessarily on their party. Those of us waiting to see Democrats regaining control may be heading towards a disappointment. I am not sure if others understand what we are up against. That's exactly what members of the House want:if you wait after November, more likely than not a number of incumbents may be kicked out of the office. Then it would be easier to pass a House enforcement bill.
Is the only hope. Reality is that we have to wait for November and hope that Democrats will gain power at the House. Is important to undestand that only the conservative repubblican are blocking and killing the bill. We have to hope for the Democrats to gain control.
I am sorry, but that is the opposite of what 4 recent elections have shown. In spite of Republicans bad reputation, the American people seem to have replaced incumbents based on their position on illegal immigration/amnesty, not necessarily on their party. Those of us waiting to see Democrats regaining control may be heading towards a disappointment. I am not sure if others understand what we are up against. That's exactly what members of the House want:if you wait after November, more likely than not a number of incumbents may be kicked out of the office. Then it would be easier to pass a House enforcement bill.
Is the only hope. Reality is that we have to wait for November and hope that Democrats will gain power at the House. Is important to undestand that only the conservative repubblican are blocking and killing the bill. We have to hope for the Democrats to gain control.
2011 hairstyles for round faces
awaiting_gc
09-13 12:36 PM
All 4 checks form me and my spouse have been encashed. and have received receipts by my attorney's office. Althought when i check status online with these receipt numbers it says my EAD application has been rejected due to improper filing and they have sent a notice to my lawyer's office on Aug 9th.
My lawyer says they haven't received anything so far. I am really concerned and I am not sure if this is normal or is my lawyer hiding something from me. (May be thier filing problem)??? please help
My lawyer says they haven't received anything so far. I am really concerned and I am not sure if this is normal or is my lawyer hiding something from me. (May be thier filing problem)??? please help
more...
gc28262
07-19 07:56 PM
My thoughts:
I understand and share the despair and hopelessness felt by EB3 guys.
Unfortunately when Visa bulletin comes out and when EB2 progresses, we EB3 guys are suddenly aware of our plight and switch to action mode. After a while this enthusiasm fades away till the next bulletin. These emotional responses won't get us anywhere. If we need to get our issues resolved, we need to work on a consistent basis irrespective of the visa bulletin status. We all need to take more active participation in IVs action items as well as contributing to IV efforts as much as we can. IMO signing up for contributions is the easiest thing to do.
Spillover issues:
Upto 2007 these spillovers were coming to EB3. Some folks analysed INA and figured it out that USCIS/DOS was interpreting spillovers incorrectly and that it should flow across. So they contacted USCIS with their findings and argued for their cause. Since then USCIS/DOS interpretation of spillover interpretation changed. Remember these folks did a thorough analysis of the laws and then approached USCIS/DOS. So to change it the other way you have to have a solid legal basis. Writing to lawmakers just out of frustration will not help. If USCIS/DOS is interpreting spillovers correctly as per law, there isn't much anyone can change it without a legislative change.
If we have to go through legislative path, there are easier fixes that can be achieved by legislative fixes like visa recapture etc. That is the reason, IV has planned a long term strategy to end retrogression for all categories. We all need to participate in these action items, contact lawmakers etc with our issues.
Here is an official IV discussion about spillover rules:
ImmigrationVoice.org - USCIS data analysis (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36#_Toc246743452)
Visa spillage rules
There is a supply of 140,000 permanent visas in the EB category for a year. EB1, EB2, EB3 have an equal share of 28.6% or 40,040 visas per year. There is a 7% cap per country on the overall legal immigration including family and skill based. This amounts to 25,620 visas for a single country in EB category. There is a rule to cap 27% of a category in a quarter. So in the first quarter only 10,811 (rounded) visas can be given in any of the categories.
If the supply exceeds demand capped by per country, then per country quota is relaxed to the matching ratio of family based approvals. For practical consideration, it means that the spillover visas beyond 25,620 to a single country can’t be given in the first 3 quarters. The last quarter spillover will need to be first in first out for all the retrogressed countries. This should not limit immigrants from other countries to use up their quota.
Following is the rule from INA Section 201to maintain ratio. There is a different section to override this logic in the last quarter of any calendar year.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that
(1) the ratio of the visa numbers made available under section 203(a) to the visa numbers made available under section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the worldwide level of immigration under section 201(c) to such level under section 201 (d);
(2) except as provided in subsection (a)(4), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 203(a) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(a), and
(3) 3/ except as provided in subsection (a)(5), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(b).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a), respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a) , respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
I understand and share the despair and hopelessness felt by EB3 guys.
Unfortunately when Visa bulletin comes out and when EB2 progresses, we EB3 guys are suddenly aware of our plight and switch to action mode. After a while this enthusiasm fades away till the next bulletin. These emotional responses won't get us anywhere. If we need to get our issues resolved, we need to work on a consistent basis irrespective of the visa bulletin status. We all need to take more active participation in IVs action items as well as contributing to IV efforts as much as we can. IMO signing up for contributions is the easiest thing to do.
Spillover issues:
Upto 2007 these spillovers were coming to EB3. Some folks analysed INA and figured it out that USCIS/DOS was interpreting spillovers incorrectly and that it should flow across. So they contacted USCIS with their findings and argued for their cause. Since then USCIS/DOS interpretation of spillover interpretation changed. Remember these folks did a thorough analysis of the laws and then approached USCIS/DOS. So to change it the other way you have to have a solid legal basis. Writing to lawmakers just out of frustration will not help. If USCIS/DOS is interpreting spillovers correctly as per law, there isn't much anyone can change it without a legislative change.
If we have to go through legislative path, there are easier fixes that can be achieved by legislative fixes like visa recapture etc. That is the reason, IV has planned a long term strategy to end retrogression for all categories. We all need to participate in these action items, contact lawmakers etc with our issues.
Here is an official IV discussion about spillover rules:
ImmigrationVoice.org - USCIS data analysis (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36#_Toc246743452)
Visa spillage rules
There is a supply of 140,000 permanent visas in the EB category for a year. EB1, EB2, EB3 have an equal share of 28.6% or 40,040 visas per year. There is a 7% cap per country on the overall legal immigration including family and skill based. This amounts to 25,620 visas for a single country in EB category. There is a rule to cap 27% of a category in a quarter. So in the first quarter only 10,811 (rounded) visas can be given in any of the categories.
If the supply exceeds demand capped by per country, then per country quota is relaxed to the matching ratio of family based approvals. For practical consideration, it means that the spillover visas beyond 25,620 to a single country can’t be given in the first 3 quarters. The last quarter spillover will need to be first in first out for all the retrogressed countries. This should not limit immigrants from other countries to use up their quota.
Following is the rule from INA Section 201to maintain ratio. There is a different section to override this logic in the last quarter of any calendar year.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that
(1) the ratio of the visa numbers made available under section 203(a) to the visa numbers made available under section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the worldwide level of immigration under section 201(c) to such level under section 201 (d);
(2) except as provided in subsection (a)(4), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 203(a) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(a), and
(3) 3/ except as provided in subsection (a)(5), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(b).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a), respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a) , respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
mchatrvd
08-26 03:55 PM
I will also suggest guys waiting with their PD current to write to the USCIS Director in DC. I did that; not sure if that worked in my case, but one needs to explore every way of bringing their case to the attention of the management.
more...
mhtanim
05-20 02:23 PM
Hi,
I filed mine on 27th July, 2007;
Do I need to apply for renewal now? How sooner or later we can apply for renewal?
You can file for renewal beginning 120 days before your EAD/AP expires.
I filed mine on 27th July, 2007;
Do I need to apply for renewal now? How sooner or later we can apply for renewal?
You can file for renewal beginning 120 days before your EAD/AP expires.
2010 women over 50 round face.
GreenMe
07-10 10:10 AM
eb3_nepa,
This flowers campaign is based on the principles of non voilent protest.
Addition to above ... Gandhigiri is name of this non voilent protest in Mumbai language term.
This flowers campaign is based on the principles of non voilent protest.
Addition to above ... Gandhigiri is name of this non voilent protest in Mumbai language term.
more...
EkAurAaya
10-30 03:46 PM
Sorry if this has already been posted
_____________________________
(c) Validity after Revocation or Withdrawal . Pursuant to the provisions of section 106(c) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21), Public Law 106-313, the approval of a Form I-140 employment-based (EB) immigrant petition shall remain valid when an alien changes jobs, if:
� A Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status, on the basis of the EB immigrant petition has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more; and
� The new job is in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the certification or approval was initially made.
If the Form I-140 has been approved and the Form I-485 has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more (as measured from the form I-485 receipt date), the approved Form I-140 will remain valid even if the alien changes jobs or employers as long as the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation. If the Form I-485 has been pending for less than 180 days, then the approved Form I-140 shall not remain valid with respect to a new offer of employment.
Accordingly, if the employer withdraws the approved Form I-140 on or after the date that the Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 shall remain valid under the provisions of �106(c) of AC21. It is expected that the alien will have submitted evidence to the office having jurisdiction over the pending Form I-485 that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupational classification as the offer of employment for which the petition was filed. Accordingly, if the underlying approved Form I-140 is withdrawn, and the alien has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the adjudicating officer must issue a Notice of Intent to Deny the pending Form I-485. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i). If the evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment submitted in response to the Notice of Intent to Deny is timely filed and it appears that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, the 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. If the applicant responds to the Notice of Intent to Deny, but has not established that the new offer o f employment is in the same or similar occupation, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485. If the alien does not respond or fails to timely respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485.
If approval of the Form I-140 is revoked or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 is no longer valid with respect to a new offer of employment and the Form I-485 may be denied. If at any time the USCIS revokes approval of the Form I-140 based on fraud, the alien will not be eligible for the job flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21 and the adjudicating officer may, in his or her discretion, deny the attached Form I-485 immediately. In all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide, and the employer must have had the intent, at the time the Form I-140 was approved, to employ the beneficiary upon adjustment. It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
Source: http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=3b9e27203295497d6f67778ecf8a4 0f9
_____________________________
(c) Validity after Revocation or Withdrawal . Pursuant to the provisions of section 106(c) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21), Public Law 106-313, the approval of a Form I-140 employment-based (EB) immigrant petition shall remain valid when an alien changes jobs, if:
� A Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status, on the basis of the EB immigrant petition has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more; and
� The new job is in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the certification or approval was initially made.
If the Form I-140 has been approved and the Form I-485 has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more (as measured from the form I-485 receipt date), the approved Form I-140 will remain valid even if the alien changes jobs or employers as long as the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation. If the Form I-485 has been pending for less than 180 days, then the approved Form I-140 shall not remain valid with respect to a new offer of employment.
Accordingly, if the employer withdraws the approved Form I-140 on or after the date that the Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 shall remain valid under the provisions of �106(c) of AC21. It is expected that the alien will have submitted evidence to the office having jurisdiction over the pending Form I-485 that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupational classification as the offer of employment for which the petition was filed. Accordingly, if the underlying approved Form I-140 is withdrawn, and the alien has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the adjudicating officer must issue a Notice of Intent to Deny the pending Form I-485. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i). If the evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment submitted in response to the Notice of Intent to Deny is timely filed and it appears that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, the 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. If the applicant responds to the Notice of Intent to Deny, but has not established that the new offer o f employment is in the same or similar occupation, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485. If the alien does not respond or fails to timely respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485.
If approval of the Form I-140 is revoked or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 is no longer valid with respect to a new offer of employment and the Form I-485 may be denied. If at any time the USCIS revokes approval of the Form I-140 based on fraud, the alien will not be eligible for the job flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21 and the adjudicating officer may, in his or her discretion, deny the attached Form I-485 immediately. In all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide, and the employer must have had the intent, at the time the Form I-140 was approved, to employ the beneficiary upon adjustment. It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
Source: http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=3b9e27203295497d6f67778ecf8a4 0f9
hair women over 50 round face.
gckalafda
03-25 04:30 PM
I have postponed my finger prints when I was in India back in Oct 2007, and I haven't got yet, should I ask them send it again or should I wait untill they send it to me.
I heared some where in the forum that when your comeback to India they took fingerprints at the prot of entry and that is sufficient.
Is that true?
Guru's Please reply if you have any Idea.
I heared some where in the forum that when your comeback to India they took fingerprints at the prot of entry and that is sufficient.
Is that true?
Guru's Please reply if you have any Idea.
more...
RSM1444
02-10 07:06 PM
Double Post Deleted
hot For Round Faces Over 50
Ram_C
11-21 12:02 PM
Dear Mehul,
I have no words to express my feelings after reading your post.
My heart goes out to you and your family, may God give you and your family the courage and strength to overcome this situation.
Do not lose your hope, Miracles do happen.
God bless you and your family.
-Ram.
I have no words to express my feelings after reading your post.
My heart goes out to you and your family, may God give you and your family the courage and strength to overcome this situation.
Do not lose your hope, Miracles do happen.
God bless you and your family.
-Ram.
more...
house Hairstyles For Women Over 50
kannan
02-03 07:49 PM
Count me too. I am from NSC to CSC, my case is still in CA only.I don't know what is happening. I have opned 2 SR's also. I am a july 2 nd filer.
tattoo makeup Round Face Hairstyles
desi3933
07-09 02:27 PM
where is the attachment?
Here is the memo. USCIS Link
(http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21intrm051205.pdf)
Refer to Page 6.
Question 8. Can an alien port to self-employment under INA � 204(j)?
Answer: Yes, as long as the requirements are met. First, the key is whether the employment is in a "same or similar" occupational classification as the job for which the original I-140 petition was filed.
..............
.
Here is the memo. USCIS Link
(http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21intrm051205.pdf)
Refer to Page 6.
Question 8. Can an alien port to self-employment under INA � 204(j)?
Answer: Yes, as long as the requirements are met. First, the key is whether the employment is in a "same or similar" occupational classification as the job for which the original I-140 petition was filed.
..............
.
more...
pictures Short Hairstyles For Round
delhiguy79
08-12 06:18 PM
As I mentioned earlier I have to land in Canada, now I am thinking of using AVR. My expired H1B was from Company A then I shifted to company B. I now have H1B extension and valid I-94 from company B.
Can I still use AVR? I didn't find the answer, anybody who used AVR(similar scenario like mine) can u plz reply....
Thanks in advance.
Can I still use AVR? I didn't find the answer, anybody who used AVR(similar scenario like mine) can u plz reply....
Thanks in advance.
dresses Haircuts For Round Faces
bestofall
11-17 03:32 PM
Sent the email to FL
more...
makeup hairstyles for round faces
green_card
05-24 12:29 AM
I made phone calls to all (10 + 2) successfully left messages for 8 but the following 4 had issues,
Sen. Cornyn's and Sen. McConnell's office phone systems do not direct you to a voicemail system (I was calling after office hours so I couldnt speak to someone either), and,
I get a 'voicemail machine full' message from the Reid and Martinez offices.
Wonder if anyone else has faced the same problem.
Will try those 4 again tomorrow
V
Sen. Cornyn's and Sen. McConnell's office phone systems do not direct you to a voicemail system (I was calling after office hours so I couldnt speak to someone either), and,
I get a 'voicemail machine full' message from the Reid and Martinez offices.
Wonder if anyone else has faced the same problem.
Will try those 4 again tomorrow
V
girlfriend Hairstyles for Round Face
abhijitp
07-06 08:50 PM
--
- There is an event organized by a Chinese organization, this is 7th July in San Jose. Please see first post of this thread for details
- Since it is such a short notice for 7th July event, who ever is interested from IV may join it. I will join to show support to the Chinese organization for our cause. You are welcome to join too.
- IV will organize a similar event on 14th July. We will publish details about location/route/time soon.
Hope this is clear.
I will participate in the IV endorsed event on 14th/ 21st July. Thanks for clarifying!
- There is an event organized by a Chinese organization, this is 7th July in San Jose. Please see first post of this thread for details
- Since it is such a short notice for 7th July event, who ever is interested from IV may join it. I will join to show support to the Chinese organization for our cause. You are welcome to join too.
- IV will organize a similar event on 14th July. We will publish details about location/route/time soon.
Hope this is clear.
I will participate in the IV endorsed event on 14th/ 21st July. Thanks for clarifying!
hairstyles hairstyles for round faces
supreet
07-08 04:02 PM
Hello All,
After being without job for almost 2 months, I am getting an offer for a short term project on 1099. Project is in my field and my job responsibilites are exactly same as what was approved on my labor. I am a Jul 07 filer.
Now, if in the next few months I get any Employement Verification RFE, what are my options? How can I answer the RFE while on 1099? What kind of documentation will I need? Has anyone successfully answered an EV RFE while on 1099?
OR
Is being on 1099 while on EAD a bad idea and I should stay away from it?
Related questions - I am not planning to file AC21 at this time as this is a short term contract and I don't want to 'notify' USCIS of any changes at this time. Can there be any potential issues of not filing for AC21 in such cases? My EAD will be up for renewal in Sept 2010 and I am hoping to be in a full time permanant position by then.
Thanks all for you replies!!!
- S
After being without job for almost 2 months, I am getting an offer for a short term project on 1099. Project is in my field and my job responsibilites are exactly same as what was approved on my labor. I am a Jul 07 filer.
Now, if in the next few months I get any Employement Verification RFE, what are my options? How can I answer the RFE while on 1099? What kind of documentation will I need? Has anyone successfully answered an EV RFE while on 1099?
OR
Is being on 1099 while on EAD a bad idea and I should stay away from it?
Related questions - I am not planning to file AC21 at this time as this is a short term contract and I don't want to 'notify' USCIS of any changes at this time. Can there be any potential issues of not filing for AC21 in such cases? My EAD will be up for renewal in Sept 2010 and I am hoping to be in a full time permanant position by then.
Thanks all for you replies!!!
- S
newu77
08-17 06:51 PM
Please reply, We would like to know if anybody got receipt notice (or cheques encashed) and satisfy following criteria:
1) I-140 approved at TSC
2) LUD on I-140 on 07/22, 07/28, 08/05, 08/12 etc...
3) I-485 mailed to NSC during last week of June or early July ?
Thanks
1) I-140 approved at TSC
2) LUD on I-140 on 07/22, 07/28, 08/05, 08/12 etc...
3) I-485 mailed to NSC during last week of June or early July ?
Thanks
gch
05-28 12:44 PM
Auto reply from
-----------------
Arlen Specter:-
---------------
I receive a large volume of E-mails, phone calls, faxes and letters every week from concerned citizens like yourself.Unfortunately, due to the high volume of mail, I can only respond if you're a resident of Pennsylvania. If you need to find out who your U.S. Senator is please go to www.senate.gov.
........
...........
------------
Lindsey Graham:-
---------------
Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I appreciate the opportunity to hear from you. Due to the large volume of mail I receive, I regret that I am only able to respond personally to inquiries from South Carolinians.
..........
........
---------------------
Dianne Feinstein:-
--------------
Thank you for sending me your electronic mail message. I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Because of the volume of e-mail that is received by my office, we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address. Please resend the text of your e-mail message, including your postal address, and I will respond to you as soon as possible.
.........
.............
-----------------
Arlen Specter:-
---------------
I receive a large volume of E-mails, phone calls, faxes and letters every week from concerned citizens like yourself.Unfortunately, due to the high volume of mail, I can only respond if you're a resident of Pennsylvania. If you need to find out who your U.S. Senator is please go to www.senate.gov.
........
...........
------------
Lindsey Graham:-
---------------
Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I appreciate the opportunity to hear from you. Due to the large volume of mail I receive, I regret that I am only able to respond personally to inquiries from South Carolinians.
..........
........
---------------------
Dianne Feinstein:-
--------------
Thank you for sending me your electronic mail message. I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Because of the volume of e-mail that is received by my office, we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address. Please resend the text of your e-mail message, including your postal address, and I will respond to you as soon as possible.
.........
.............
No comments:
Post a Comment