Well I found something that might of interest.

Article Precursors of Mars: Constraints from nitrogen and oxygen iso...

Sorry I kind of lost touch.

I agree with you Sobhi. However, you actually don't need a significant CI to form the Earth. Oxygen isotopic composition of the Earth's mantle is like that of the Enstatite (E) chondrites. Nitrogen isotopic composition is also much different from what one sees in CI. But I am really surprised why people normally normalise various compositions to the CI! For example, people have tried to explain the precursors of Mars by the carbonaceous chondrites, while the isotopic compositions of O, N and Cr suggest it actually formed from a mixture of E and Ordinary chondrite like precursors. As per life, an interesting suggestion is comets. It is possible that cometary impacts in the late stages could have produced the biosphere.

Planets formed, are forming and they continue to grow from

all available material sources from dust to pieces of Super

Nova explosions. The availability of the materials has dwindled

with time, but planets still grow from a continual accumulation of dust,

and the occasional large impact objects, and from all sizes of

materials in between.

The current average increase in Earth mass is small at

about 1.3 x 10^15 kg per year increase in mass. Spread evenly over

the entire surface of the earth it would be less than 1 mm in thickness

per year. ( 0.96 mm ).

Normal Stony meteorites are also an important source of materials.

they mostly burn up in the atmosphere to supply the dust.

Indeed, the hypothesis of CI chondrites as the primordial material should be re-evaluated, because it has a lot of issues. 

I invite you to check our attempt in this topic

Article Chemical Differentiation of Planets: A Core Issue

Thank you for sharing your manuscript. It's interesting. I totally agree with you on the re-evaluation of the CI.