GC issuance by USCIS before date is current in Bulletin

[usvisas]

applicants who are not current are receiving RFEs and GCs

do you know a lot of such real cases that received GC's w/o PD being current or just saw or heard a few of them somewhere?

[suninphx]

do you know a lot of such real cases that received GC's w/o PD being current or just saw or heard a few of them somewhere?

Anyone receiving the GC without the PD being current should return the card to the USCIS. AFAIK - that is right the way to handle it.

[Pundit Arjun]

do you know a lot of such real cases that received GC's w/o PD being current or just saw or heard a few of them somewhere?

I know of one case where someone got greened when his PD was not current. This happened during the 2007 fiasco. He did not return and He is now a citizen.

[vedu]

I know of one case where someone got greened when his PD was not current. This happened during the 2007 fiasco. He did not return and He is now a citizen.

I would like to side with you on this one. If you get your GC when your date is close to being current, then I think you should keep it. The problem is not with returning GC, but what happens to your case after that when you are trying to reverse the process. It is like a black hole. You sending your approved GC back in that black hole and trying to revert the status of your approved I-485 case back to pending may be too risky. You may remain pending or even worst, unknown status in the system for a long time due to this confusion, while others with PDs similar to yours will get their GCs left and right.

[Moveon]

I would like to side with you on this one. If you get your GC when your date is close to being current, then I think you should keep it. The problem is not with returning GC, but what happens to your case after that when you are trying to reverse the process. It is like a black hole. You sending your approved GC back in that black hole and trying to revert the status of your approved I-485 case back to pending may be too risky. You may remain pending or even worst, unknown status in the system for a long time due to this confusion, while others with PDs similar to yours will get their GCs left and right.

I don't think the USCIS website has guidance on this situation, atleast I could not find it . If that is the case you can claim benefit of doubt and just keep it . I don't think it will be a case of Citizenship denial .

[vedu]

I don't think the USCIS website has guidance on this situation, atleast I could not find it . If that is the case you can claim benefit of doubt and just keep it . I don't think it will be a case of Citizenship denial .

That is another good point that you have brought up! Already we have suffered this excruciatingly painful wait of 10-12 years due to unfair laws. So when you get your GC, run with it. There is no need to show "Stockholm Syndrome" and think of returning it. You deserve it more than anybody else.

[suninphx]

Everyone is entitled to take their own risks but it may be worthwhile going through these threads.


https://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/2034893467/i-485-approved-green-card-received-but-priority-date-not-current
https://trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/1361456975/i485-approval-notice-date-when-pd-not-current
https://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/419323419/i-485-gc-approved-pd-not-current

[vedu]

Suninphx, it is lawyers' job to complicate things. Here is my take on it. You applied for I-485, waited patiently, and one fine day USCIS sent you GC. Now it is not your job to confirm its validity, keep an eye on visa bulletin, keep watching priority dates, etc. etc.

It's a completely different story if you willingly misrepresent the facts, lie on application, etc. But in this case, you have done nothing wrong. If USCIS eventually finds out that they sent you GC a couple of months earlier than it was supposed to, then they should contact you, take the original GC back, and reissue a new GC.

[suninphx]

Suninphx, it is lawyers' job to complicate things. Here is my take on it. You applied for I-485, waited patiently, and one fine day USCIS sent you GC. Now it is not your job to confirm its validity, keep an eye on visa bulletin, keep watching priority dates, etc. etc.

It's a completely different story if you willingly misrepresent the facts, lie on application, etc. But in this case, you have done nothing wrong. If USCIS eventually finds out that they sent you GC a couple of months earlier than it was supposed to, then they should contact you, take the original GC back, and reissue a new GC.

Vedu,

I am not going to argue with you or anyone else on this topic and I won't comment on what you said about lawyers as it's very subjective. Just read through the threads (if you want to) and decide what you want to do. People have made many valid (according to me) points. Your take on this can be different and I am fine with that as it doesn't affect me personally.

I just shared so that it might help people to take the educated decision should the situation arise.

[vedu]

Suninphx,

That's a fair point. But here is an interesting scenario to ponder upon. Say back in 2012, you and your friend had the same priority date and it was current back then. He received his GC and unfortunately you didn't. Then the dates retrogressed for a long time. Now finally your date is about to become current again, but you received your GC a month before that happens. Should you return your GC and should your friend get to keep it? Or should both of you keep it because your dates were current once previously and both of you received your respective GCs after that initial current date? Or should both of you return it because the dates are now retrogressed? What do you think?

[vsivarama]

Suninphx, it is lawyers' job to complicate things. Here is my take on it. You applied for I-485, waited patiently, and one fine day USCIS sent you GC. Now it is not your job to confirm its validity, keep an eye on visa bulletin, keep watching priority dates, etc. etc.


Because we waited for a decade it makes more sense to make sure everything is right. We cannot be arrogant/flippant like ROW folks. If their GC is ever revoked, They can reapply at a future time and get it in no time. We do not have the luxury. We cannot plead ignorance of law in most immigration cases. My two cents. Not meant to offend anyone. The readers in this forum are pretty knowledgeable compared to other forums. But is better to see both sides of the coin.

[vedu]

Because we waited for a decade it makes more sense to make sure everything is right. We cannot be arrogant/flippant like ROW folks. If their GC is ever revoked, They can reapply at a future time and get it in no time. We do not have the luxury. We cannot plead ignorance of law in most immigration cases.

Then point to that law in the USCIS rule book...not to what lawyers are saying. And if indeed, the USCIS rule book says that you should proactively return your GC in such a case, then everybody should do the right thing by the book...there is no doubt about it. But don't do it just because lawyers are saying so. As they say, you shouldn't ask your barber whether you need a haircut.

[suninphx]

Suninphx,

That's a fair point. But here is an interesting scenario to ponder upon. Say back in 2012, you and your friend had the same priority date and it was current back then. He received his GC and unfortunately you didn't. Then the dates retrogressed for a long time. Now finally your date is about to become current again, but you received your GC a month before that happens. Should you return your GC and should your friend get to keep it? Or should both of you keep it because your dates were current once previously and both of you received your respective GCs after that initial current date? Or should both of you return it because the dates are now retrogressed? What do you think?

Vedu,

It's not that complicated :)

Assuming a visa number was assigned to my friend's case when the dates were current he should be fine. If that's not the case then it's for my friend to decide what he wants to do.

In case of anyone getting approval a month before priority date becomes current then why not do the right thing? As it is we have waited for so long.

[vsivarama]

Then point to that law in the USCIS rule book...not to what lawyers are saying. And if indeed, the USCIS rule book says that you should proactively return your GC in such a case, then everybody should do the right thing by the book...there is no doubt about it. But don't do it just because lawyers are saying so. As they say, you shouldn't ask your barber whether you need a haircut.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1256&num=0&edition=prelim

I went to this link via USCIS.gov. You will get some details on how it goes if GC is revoked.

[vsivarama]

Suninphx,

That's a fair point. But here is an interesting scenario to ponder upon. Say back in 2012, you and your friend had the same priority date and it was current back then. He received his GC and unfortunately you didn't. Then the dates retrogressed for a long time. Now finally your date is about to become current again, but you received your GC a month before that happens. Should you return your GC and should your friend get to keep it? Or should both of you keep it because your dates were current once previously and both of you received your respective GCs after that initial current date? Or should both of you return it because the dates are now retrogressed? What do you think?

You get your GC when they can assign you with a visa number. Obviously in this scenario they had a number to spare for my friend but not for me. So he got it in 2012. If they had a number to spare for me back in 2012, I would have gotten my GC a month or two later and not after 8 years. The context matters and of course it will be different this year with record 120K spillover if you get your GC one month before Your PD is current. Chances are high it would be legitimate. But no harm in checking with USCIS.

[vedu]

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1256&num=0&edition=prelim

I went to this link via USCIS.gov. You will get some details on how it goes if GC is revoked.

Okay, look at this what USCIS did in the recent past when they issued incorrect green cards:

https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-to-recall-incorrectly-dated-green-cards#:~:text=The%20affected%20individuals%20shoul d%20return,of%20receiving%20the%20incorrect%20card .

In summary, USCIS issued a recall, gave people time to return the GC, and promised to send them replacement Green Cards within 15 days of receiving the incorrect card. People were not proactively required to inform USCIS about it.

[vsivarama]

Okay, look at this what USCIS did in the recent past when they issued incorrect green cards:

https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-to-recall-incorrectly-dated-green-cards#:~:text=The%20affected%20individuals%20shoul d%20return,of%20receiving%20the%20incorrect%20card .

In summary, USCIS issued a recall, gave people time to return the GC, and promised to send them replacement Green Cards within 15 days of receiving the incorrect card. People were not proactively required to inform USCIS about it.

I am aware of that and it's a totally different issue. They issued regular GC's instead of conditional GCs. Fiancées do NOT qualify for regular GCs like you and I. They transition from conditional GCs to a regular one. It's more like one of those where your information is printed wrong in your GC. Anyways, I have provided the source it's up to interpretation what everyone thinks of the information. Some judge may take a favorable view because it was a USCIS mistake while others may not. Either way by not following the laws we will be putting ourselves in a position where we do not control our fate. So, people should take what they will from this discussion.

[vedu]

I am aware of that and it's a totally different issue. They issued regular GC's instead of conditional GCs. Fiancées do NOT qualify for regular GCs like you and I. They transition from conditional GCs to a regular one. Anyways, I have provided the source it's up to interpretation what everyone thinks of the information. Some judge may take a favorable view because it was a USCIS mistake while others may not. Either way by not following the laws we will be putting ourselves in a position where we do not control our fate. So, people should take what they will from this discussion.

Would you say these people didn't follow the law by accepting regular GC's even though they clearly knew they were not eligible for them at the time?

[vsivarama]

Would you say these people didn't follow the law by accepting regular GC's even though they clearly knew they were not eligible for them at the time?

You have a visa number available and a GC was sent to you with the errors/misprints in your personal info. Is it an illegitimate GC? I don't think so.

[vedu]

You have a visa number available and a GC was sent to you with the errors/misprints in your personal info. Is it an illegitimate GC? I don't think so.

Okay, if the USCIS wouldn't have found it, then it would have been all legal/legitimate then. No need of conditional GCs in those cases because it was USCIS's mistake.

[vsivarama]

Okay, if the USCIS wouldn't have found it, then it would have been all legal/legitimate then. No need of conditional GCs in those cases because it was USCIS's mistake.

I have shown you the law, You still want to argue that you are right go ahead and disregard it. Let everyone else make their mind as you have made up yours based on the facts presented. I do not want to drag this any further. My intent was not to show off or offend any one. It was just to provide information.

[vedu]

I have shown you the law, You still want to argue that you are right go ahead and disregard it. Let everyone else make their mind as you have made up yours based on the facts presented. I do not want to drag this any further. My intent was not to show off or offend any one. It was just to provide information.

Yes, and I have also shown you how USCIS corrects the situation when it realizes it issued something incorrectly. Let everyone else make their mind as you also have made up yours based on the facts presented. Sometimes due to internal dynamics between DOS and USCIS, there can be a time lag between actual visa number availability and when the bulletin gets published that we don't get to see. Similar to how sometimes it can take up to a year to get your GC even when your date is current, you may also get it little earlier if you date is about to become current, particularly in the last quarter when they are in the process of accelerating visa issuance in order to consume as many numbers as possible.

[vedu]

Okay, here is one other thing I would like to add just for information purpose. Say, if in a rare case you get your GC when your PD is not current and if you decide to keep it, then you can do at least this one small thing to play it as safe as you can. Don't use it, don't update your I-9 form with your employer, don't renew your driving license based on that GC until your PD becomes current in a month or so. Until then continue to use whatever status you were previously in (H-1B, EAD, etc.). When your PD becomes current, then the visa numbers are clearly available to you and you can consider your GC valid. I guess I am just thinking too much about this and give it a rest now!!!:)

[Moveon]

Would you say these people didn't follow the law by accepting regular GC's even though they clearly knew they were not eligible for them at the time?

The granting of GC when PD Is not current is a very rare case. in terms of % would that be less than .1% I guess. And even in this case you might get it a month or two early at most. The system typically would not allow such an approval and if anyone granted it that would be an accidental over ride at more that 2 levels. I don't think the USCIS has the time and resources to deny someone citizenship in such cases unless there are other reasons like a criminal case that would give them an excuse to kick that person out.
I think that the system is not built to handle the return of GCs and you might be caught in this undefined state for too long - "Thrishanku Swargha" as they call it .

[qesehmk]

Once you get your GC there is no need to second guess the process by which it was adjudicated.

Just move on.

[AceMan]

Anyone receiving the GC without the PD being current should return the card to the USCIS. AFAIK - that is right the way to handle it.

I know a very specific case of a person 3-4 years back who had the screen name kabhoga in trackitt got Green card issued before his PD initially. He took pains to return the green card based on the lawyer advise and after about 6-9 months he got a new green card which had the start date from the time original green card was issued.


https://www.trackitt.com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/1834062029/impact-of-service-request

[jimmys]

Once you get your GC there is no need to second guess the process by which it was adjudicated.

Just move on.

When they find out it's a USCIS error later, they will try to blame it on you for not notifying them the error in first place.

[qesehmk]

When they find out it's a USCIS error later, they will try to blame it on you for not notifying them the error in first place.
Absolutely not. But I don't think it ever happens that they issue GCs ahead of time. That's Day dreaming.

[delguy]

When they find out it's a USCIS error later, they will try to blame it on you for not notifying them the error in first place.

Around a million GCs are issued every year and you guys really think most of the people actually are well versed with tracking priority dates and somehow matching the issuance date with a VB? I have relatives and friends from India who got GCs in EB1C in past, and I am sure they have no clue what exactly a visa bulletin is and how to check the dates. Most of us know about VBs because we are in such severe backlogs. Otherwise you just fill up the forms and let the law firm take care of the rest.

Unless there is fraud involved and applicant is part of that, there is nothing to worry about. USCIS will contact if they made a mistake. If they want you to cross check VBs after GC issuance, they will inform you when GC is issued.

[srisri]

Absolutely not. But I don't think it ever happens that they issue GCs ahead of time. That's Day dreaming.

Q - in the last 10 years since I have been reading immigration forums, I have read multiple instances where people who got GC when their dates were not current run into trouble. There was one case where a person was giving GC a week before the date was current and later was revoked without prejudice due to USCIS error, he was asked to show evidence of the job offer to re issue his GC. Which I think he didn’t as he left the employer. You can search in trackitt and may find the case.

I would recommend to speak with the attorneys and take relevant steps so in future you have something to show you did your due diligence and the error is in USCIS court.

For all other categories other than employment based. GC doesn’t require an employment offer at the time of reissue in such instances and a mere re application of I-485 would suffice.

[qesehmk]

Q - in the last 10 years since I have been reading immigration forums, I have read multiple instances where people who got GC when their dates were not current run into trouble. There was one case where a person was giving GC a week before the date was current and later was revoked without prejudice due to USCIS error, he was asked to show evidence of the job offer to re issue his GC. Which I think he didn’t as he left the employer. You can search in trackitt and may find the case.

I would recommend to speak with the attorneys and take relevant steps so in future you have something to show you did your due diligence and the error is in USCIS court.

For all other categories other than employment based. GC doesn’t require an employment offer at the time of reissue in such instances and a mere re application of I-485 would suffice.

Sri - You are a long timer so your opinion certainly weighs heavy. I do come across such anomalies but then I treat them as anomalies. Also remember, people lie fudge and make up things behind the safety of their computers. Even when they are asking advice they have to say they are asking for a friend of theirs - as if their friend doesn't know how to use internet!!

I can't speak for everyone but I guess I wont ever go to USCIS and tell them that they may have not followed their own rules and regulations in issuing my GC!! It's a very different matter if somebody wires you money and you blow through it. You are liable to pay it back!! But even then they can't punish you if you don't go and tell them that you got some extra money in your account.

I guess what I am trying to say is ... live a little bit fearless. If you have lived a clean life - and you get lucky with USCIS then enjoy it and believe me you deserve it. I have witnessed how USCIS and DOS at least since 2008 have been creative in finding creative ways to reduce ROW backlog and starve EB-IC. That has been quite racist of them IMHO. So if they make a mistake and issue any one of you a GC. Their mistake. I wouldn't go to town about it.

[vedu]

Sri - You are a long timer so your opinion certainly weighs heavy. I do come across such anomalies but then I treat them as anomalies. Also remember, people lie fudge and make up things behind the safety of their computers. Even when they are asking advice they have to say they are asking for a friend of theirs - as if their friend doesn't know how to use internet!!

I can't speak for everyone but I guess I wont ever go to USCIS and tell them that they may have not followed their own rules and regulations in issuing my GC!! It's a very different matter if somebody wires you money and you blow through it. You are liable to pay it back!! But even then they can't punish you if you don't go and tell them that you got some extra money in your account.

I guess what I am trying to say is ... live a little bit fearless. If you have lived a clean life - and you get lucky with USCIS then enjoy it and believe me you deserve it. I have witnessed how USCIS and DOS at least since 2008 have been creative in finding creative ways to reduce ROW backlog and starve EB-IC. That has been quite racist of them IMHO. So if they make a mistake and issue any one of you a GC. Their mistake. I wouldn't go to town about it.

Wow, couldn't have said it better myself! The AceMan's Trackitt example above showing somebody spent $15,000 on the lawyer to get the same GC reissued is the height of stupidity! Some people will never learn to live fearlessly even when they are given citizenship. The government agencies are there to help people, not to screw them. If they made a genuine mistake and realized it afterwards, they will do good by the people, not hold it against them. I have that much faith in the government. Also, if they ask you to show evidence of the job offer or being employed for certain number of years, etc. (whatever the law requires) and if you can't show them, then you were never a genuine applicant in the first place.

[vedu]

Q - in the last 10 years since I have been reading immigration forums, I have read multiple instances where people who got GC when their dates were not current run into trouble. There was one case where a person was giving GC a week before the date was current and later was revoked without prejudice due to USCIS error, he was asked to show evidence of the job offer to re issue his GC. Which I think he didn’t as he left the employer. You can search in trackitt and may find the case.

I would recommend to speak with the attorneys and take relevant steps so in future you have something to show you did your due diligence and the error is in USCIS court.

For all other categories other than employment based. GC doesn’t require an employment offer at the time of reissue in such instances and a mere re application of I-485 would suffice.

Even in the worst of the worst scenario, there is a statute of limitations of 5 years. That I got from the link Visivarama shared before: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1256&num=0&edition=prelim

After that, even the Attorney General can't come after you. Somebody please correct me if I am wrong in my interpretation. Otherwise, that's the final word.

[Moveon]

Even in the worst of the worst scenario, there is a statute of limitations of 5 years. That I got from the link Visivarama shared before: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1256&num=0&edition=prelim

After that, even the Attorney General can't come after you. Somebody please correct me if I am wrong in my interpretation. Otherwise, that's the final word.

I agree with Vedu and Q. Stop living in eternal fear. You are losing sleep for the .001% case and the govt will not come behind you for their mistake . They can't recall your green card because if they do , they will not be able to place you into any immigration status , IOWs its a state not handled by the system. They have nothing to gain unless you committed an immigration fraud to game the system in which case they will take action. Maybe those were the cases , but no will accept that they committed anything wrong .
Lets close this thread and moveon to the more important things that need to be addressed .

[srimurthy]

Discussion and Information around GC issuance by USCIS before date is current in Bulletin

[Moveon]

Thanks for the new thread .
Guys , once you get an RFE these days how long does it take for the dates to become current ? Asking in the context of EB2-I cases that got EAD in 2012 .
I suppose there is no interview for those who filed AOS in 2012 .

Finally any idea on the trakkit thread that shows dates on RFEs for PDs .

Thanks

[srisri]

Wow, couldn't have said it better myself! The AceMan's Trackitt example above showing somebody spent $15,000 on the lawyer to get the same GC reissued is the height of stupidity! Some people will never learn to live fearlessly even when they are given citizenship. The government agencies are there to help people, not to screw them. If they made a genuine mistake and realized it afterwards, they will do good by the people, not hold it against them. I have that much faith in the government. Also, if they ask you to show evidence of the job offer or being employed for certain number of years, etc. (whatever the law requires) and if you can't show them, then you were never a genuine applicant in the first place.

Vedu - I think it’s the choice of the individual based on their risk appetite. I wouldn’t call someone foolish or stupid if they chose to either speak or not speak to USCIS. Also, the person left the job in the initial petition doesn’t mean he is not gainfully employed. I don’t know that particular individual’s situation so can’t comment if he was a genuine applicant. As far as I remember he filed MTR and spent a lot of money to get his GC back which he could have avoided if he approached USCIS at the time is issuance. Having said that there could be other examples where similar situation was never an issue.

I spent 20 years in this country w/o GC and if I ever get into such situation I would reach out to USCIS and get it resolved. I wouldn’t have the time and energy to deal with it say 5 years down the line.

Peace out guys. Hopefully the VB comes out soon and we can see light at the end of the tunnel.

[vedu]

Vedu - I think it’s the choice of the individual based on their risk appetite. I wouldn’t call someone foolish or stupid if they chose to either speak or not speak to USCIS. Also, the person left the job in the initial petition doesn’t mean he is not gainfully employed. I don’t know that particular individual’s situation so can’t comment if he was a genuine applicant. As far as I remember he filed MTR and spent a lot of money to get his GC back which he could have avoided if he approached USCIS at the time is issuance. Having said that there could be other examples where similar situation was never an issue.

I spent 20 years in this country w/o GC and if I ever get into such situation I would reach out to USCIS and get it resolved. I wouldn’t have the time and energy to deal with it say 5 years down the line.

Peace out guys. Hopefully the VB comes out soon and we can see light at the end of the tunnel.

The problem with most of the trackitt examples I have reviewed is as follows. The person calls USCIS about it, and the first level USCIS representative that they talk to is himself confused about what the guy is talking about. What if you talk to USCIS contact person and he tells you there is no issue. You can't go past him and request to talk to his boss. Are you going to force him to take the GC back in that case? If he still doesn't want to take it back, are you going to get an expensive attorney involved? How far are you going to go to force USCIS to reverse the process? On the other hand, if you are satisfied with the first level USCIS person that you get to talk to and once he says there is no issue, you give it up, then also there is no guarantee that eventually somebody higher up in USCIS won't catch the mistake and then blame it on you. Or are you going to demand it in writing if they say there is no issue?

Also if you follow Trackitt, some people who returned the GC got the same GC (with the same expiry date) reissued, because I suspect USCIS has noway to undo previously approved I-485. Let's for the sake of argument, they figure out how to take back previously approved I-485 after a long pending state (year or so), and meanwhile, your old Medical expired. So, you may get a new RFE, another medical, etc., etc. Are you willing to go through that hassle all over again after already spending 20 years in this mess?

Also, the law says that after five years, the statute of limitations ends and nobody can come after you. That part is crystal clear to all of us. So, some people's claims that this can create problem while applying for citizenship are certainly not true. You can apply for citizenship after five years. At the end of the day, it is an extremely rare occurrence, and to each his own.

[AceMan]

Vedu - I think it’s the choice of the individual based on their risk appetite. I wouldn’t call someone foolish or stupid if they chose to either speak or not speak to USCIS. Also, the person left the job in the initial petition doesn’t mean he is not gainfully employed. I don’t know that particular individual’s situation so can’t comment if he was a genuine applicant. As far as I remember he filed MTR and spent a lot of money to get his GC back which he could have avoided if he approached USCIS at the time is issuance. Having said that there could be other examples where similar situation was never an issue.

I spent 20 years in this country w/o GC and if I ever get into such situation I would reach out to USCIS and get it resolved. I wouldn’t have the time and energy to deal with it say 5 years down the line.

Peace out guys. Hopefully the VB comes out soon and we can see light at the end of the tunnel.

For this person USCIs had got the dates wrong March 2005 instead of March 2007 and processed the 485 few months early.

[jimmys]

Vedu - I think it’s the choice of the individual based on their risk appetite. I wouldn’t call someone foolish or stupid if they chose to either speak or not speak to USCIS. Also, the person left the job in the initial petition doesn’t mean he is not gainfully employed. I don’t know that particular individual’s situation so can’t comment if he was a genuine applicant. As far as I remember he filed MTR and spent a lot of money to get his GC back which he could have avoided if he approached USCIS at the time is issuance. Having said that there could be other examples where similar situation was never an issue.

I spent 20 years in this country w/o GC and if I ever get into such situation I would reach out to USCIS and get it resolved. I wouldn’t have the time and energy to deal with it say 5 years down the line.

Peace out guys. Hopefully the VB comes out soon and we can see light at the end of the tunnel.

I true that. Let USCIS know and take it from there.

USCIS makes lot of errors in approving H-1B/H-4/L-1 visas. And, applicants and lawyers who are contacting USCIS to correct their errors on H-1/H-4 are not foolish and stupid.