Tweet
I have a rather unique situation and would need some direction here. I filed for the LULAC in early 2005 and had my interview in Sept 2005. I was told I needed to provide addt'l supporting documentation and was given 3 months. I walked in and submitted more proof early Feb. 2006.
Well, it's been 2 1/2 months and no word, so I decided to take the Infopass route and speak to an I. Officer. All I got from the Officer was more puzzle to my anxiety. She confirmed there had been activity on my file around end March 2006 but she cannot tell me what that was. However, she kinda commented to me, 'Why is there an I-130 petition filed on your behalf?' Of coourse I did not file one and asked her to reconfirm my A# and Receipt # which she did. Almost simultaneously she remarked, 'Oh, okay I see.' I asked if everything was okay and she replied 'Yes.'
At that point, she only added that I should wait until Sept. '06 (1 yr after my interview) before they can follow up with my file which was now transferred to their Dunwoody offices. Does anyone know why there an I-130 attached to my file?
I am completely clueless and any help is most graciously appreciated.
Goodgam
Well, it's been 2 1/2 months and no word, so I decided to take the Infopass route and speak to an I. Officer. All I got from the Officer was more puzzle to my anxiety. She confirmed there had been activity on my file around end March 2006 but she cannot tell me what that was. However, she kinda commented to me, 'Why is there an I-130 petition filed on your behalf?' Of coourse I did not file one and asked her to reconfirm my A# and Receipt # which she did. Almost simultaneously she remarked, 'Oh, okay I see.' I asked if everything was okay and she replied 'Yes.'
At that point, she only added that I should wait until Sept. '06 (1 yr after my interview) before they can follow up with my file which was now transferred to their Dunwoody offices. Does anyone know why there an I-130 attached to my file?
I am completely clueless and any help is most graciously appreciated.
Goodgam
Comment