rambobu Posted April 29, 2013 Report Share Posted April 29, 2013 Here is the history Spouse and I filed 485 in Sep 2004. I filed as derivative EB3-India, PD - 10/24/2002 (current since Dec 2012) Spouse approved in June 2007 Spouse became USC Aug 2012 130 approved Jan 2011 I Interfiled Sep 2012 with an approved 130 as a spouse of a USC Dec 2012 EB3 current Interview on Apr 23rd 2013. Seemed like a Family based Interview. Approved. Got welcome notice on Apr 27th under code E39 - EB3 Is this an issue? Link to comment
rambobu Posted May 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 I am sorry if i did not communicate right. My questions is - Is it an issue to be abpproved under E39 and not IR6? Do I contact USCIS? Link to comment
rambobu Posted May 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 Sorry if I did not communicate well, my question is - Is it an issue to be approved under E39 and not IR6? Link to comment
JoeF Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 Doesn't matter, if the EB3 was current. Link to comment
Belle Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 It must have pulled a wrong code off the database. I would not worry about it. Generally, a person would not know what the code means. So, it's not your responsibility to fix it, even if it were broken. Link to comment
rambobu Posted May 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2013 Thanks JoeF and Belle. Link to comment
rambobu Posted May 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2013 The attorney emailed USCIS (without asking me) and they said they will review and get back. They also said in their email If they think it is in error then i need to file a no fee I90. After 11 years i thought i was done but seems like it never ends. Link to comment
pontevecchio Posted May 18, 2013 Report Share Posted May 18, 2013 Instant gratification is always a myth. I suggest letting the Lawyer do the heavy lifting. Once the GC is sorted you will not ever need an Immigration Lawyer. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.