x**l
发帖数: 2337 | 1 Evidence of the receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of evidence.
The petitioner has submitted prizes or awards received by the beneficiary
that appear to have been received while early in your career. Receiving a
3rd place awards are not considered major national or international prizes
or awards, since this not a 1st or 2nd place award, and furthermore it has
not been established the significance of this award. Receiving teaching
awards are not considered to be nationally or internationally recognized
prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor, because they are
generally given to students or career professionals in the field. In
addition these teaching awards were limited to the university you worked at
and is not considered national or international awards. If the petitioner
believes the prizes or awards are nationally or internationally recognized
prizes or awards for excellence in the field, the petitioner may submit:…
Documentation of membership in associations in the field for which
classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their
members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their
disciplines or fields.
This criterion has not been met because the evidence does not shown that the
basis for granting memberships in the submitted associations was that your
outstanding achievements in the field of endeavor as judged by recognized
national or international experts in the field. It has been established that
outstandingachievements are required to become a member of the above
associations. To assist in determining that your memberships satisfy this
criterion, the petitioner may submit:
. Information to establish that the individuals who review propective
members’ applications are recognized as national or international experts
in their disciplines or fields: and
. The section of the association’s constitution or bylaws which discuss the
qualifications required of the reviews on the review panel of the
association.
Published material about you in professional or major trade publications or
major media, relating to your work in the field for which claasification is
sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the
material, and any necessary translation.
This carterion has not been met because the evidence does not indicate that
the published material was published in professional or major trade
publications or other major media. Having ones work cited in various
journals does not meet this criterion, since the material is not primarily
about the petitioner’s work but rather a reference to their work. To assist
in determining that the publications qualify as professional or major trade
publications or other major media, the petitioner may submit:
.Submit evidence there are articals that are primarily about the beneficiary
’s work that was discussed in professional or major trade publications or
other major media.
.Documentary evidence including:
. The title, date, and author of the published material;
. The circulation (online and/or in print); and
. The intened audience of the publication.
Notes:
. Additional published material should be dated prior to the date of
submission of this Form I-140
. The published material should be about the beneficiary’s work in the
field, not just about the beneficiary’s employer or other organizations the
beneficiary’s is associated with:
. Marketing materials created for the purpose of seiling the beneficiary’s
products or promoting the beneficiary’s services are not generally
considered to be published material about the beneficiary;
And
. Unevaluated listings in a subject matter index or footnote, or reference
to the beneficiary’s work without evaluation are insufficient.
Evidence of your participation, either individually or on a panel, as a
judge of the work of others in the same or allied field.
You have claimed to have been invited to review manuscripts for the….
You have indicated you have review for various journals; however, there is
no evidence to establish that the beneficiary actually participated in these
reviews. Plese provide evidence that establishes that the beneficiary
actually participated in the judging of the work of others for which they
were invited.
.Submit the emails from all the journals you have claimed to have been
invited to review for in confirming you have actually performed those
manuscript reviews, and not just simply invited.
Evidence of your original scientific, scholarly, artistic, or business-
related contributions of major significance in your field.
The criterion has not been met because the evidence submitted does not show
that your contributions are considered to be of major significance to the
field of endeavor. Many of the letters of support were from individuals who
already knew you, and the letters of support were general in nature, and did
not establish your accomplishments are any greater than your peers. USCIS
does not find the totality of your work has risen to a major significance
within your field. Given your low publication rate, and low citation record
it has not been established your work has made a major significant impact
within your field. Having published your work in various journals, and
writing a book is inherent to the position in which you serve in, and based
on the evidence your work has not made a major significant inpact. To assist
in determing whether of your contributions are original and of major
siginificance, you may submit:
. Objective documentary evidence of the significance of your contribution to
the field.
. Evidence of your work being implemented by others. Possible evidence may
include but is not limited to:
. Contracts with companies using of your products;
. Licensed technology being used by others;
. Patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant to the
field.
. Any other relevant evidence.
Evidence of your authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in
professional or major trade publications or other major media
This criterion has been met.
Evidence you have performed in a leading or critical role for organizations
or establishments that have a distinguished reputation.
This criterion has not been met because the evidence does not indicate that
you have performed in a leading or critical role. The position and duties
you have performed are inherent to the position Post-doctoral fellows, and
assistant professor, Post-doctoral fellows and assistant professor across
the country hold positions such as this; therefore it is not enough to claim
this is a leading or critical role by virture of holding the positions.
Performing complex research and instructing students is inherent to all post
-doctoral fellows, and assistant professors, and is not considered a leading
or critical role. To assist in determining that you have performed in a
leading or critical role for you may submit:ocumentary evidence to
demonstrate how your role was/is leading or critical for the origanizations
or establishments.
. It is not the title of your role. But rather your performance in the role
that determines whether the role id leading or critical. As such, include
details regarding ehy your performance in the role was leading or critical.
. Documentary evidence to establish that you have been a leader or has
somehow contributed in a way that is of significant importance to the
outcome of the organizations or establishments activities.
. Documentary evidence to demonstrate how your performance is or was leading
or critical compared to others employed in similar pursuits within the
field endeavor.
Details beyond generalities are required, such as the specific tasks or
accomplishments of you as compared to others who participated in the field
of endeavor.
. Any other relevant evidence. | x**l
发帖数: 2337 | 2 目前10条只满足了一条，如果当时把审稿后人家回复我的邮件附上了，估计会满足2条
。 | K*N
发帖数: 7494 | 3 你什么条件？贴出来大家给你出出主意。不行或者你可以重新组织材料，重新再交一次
。bless。 | z******n
发帖数: 494 | | x**l
发帖数: 2337 | 5 我大致情况是这样的：1）某部委科技进步三等奖参与人，某高校优秀教学奖三次2）审
稿4个杂志7次3）外文文章5篇，其中一作2篇，中文文章11篇，其中一作10篇，国际会
议文章24篇，其中一作7篇。参编书3本，都不是一作，翻译出版书2本，也不是一作。 | x**l
发帖数: 2337 | 6 我是生物医学工程方面的土鳖，我文章的影响因子有一篇一作是5吧，文章引用不多啊
，外文的10多次，中文的30多次吧 | x**l
发帖数: 2337 | | b******g
发帖数: 1721 | 8 总结：
paper: 29 book chapter: 3
review: 7
award: technique award,3rd level.
citation？
应该不错的啊，当然可以继续申请或这个角RFE，那就继续。或者参照大蜜蜂的经典文
来挖掘。 | r******y
发帖数: 21907 | 9 吹了证据不足吧
【在 x**l 的大作中提到】
: 我是针对每一条都吹了一下啊
| x**l
发帖数: 2337 | 10 paper: 29 book chapter: 3
review: 7
award: technique award,3rd level.
citation 13（外文）+35（中文） | | | i******t
发帖数: 22541 | 11 推荐信啥样的？
这个很重要的啊
【在 x**l 的大作中提到】
: paper: 29 book chapter: 3
: review: 7
: award: technique award,3rd level.
: citation 13（外文）+35（中文）
| j****t
发帖数: 1663 | 12 bless!
DIY还是找的律师？
PP了吗？ | x**l
发帖数: 2337 | 13 5个推荐信，我老板，我们所长，三个独立推荐人，一个美国的华人，一个英国的，一
个芬兰的。 | x**l
发帖数: 2337 | | r******y
发帖数: 21907 | 15 除了饮用少还是挺强的，看的我心虚啊。饮用少只要你跟别人比还是多也好
【在 x**l 的大作中提到】
: 我大致情况是这样的：1）某部委科技进步三等奖参与人，某高校优秀教学奖三次2）审
: 稿4个杂志7次3）外文文章5篇，其中一作2篇，中文文章11篇，其中一作10篇，国际会
: 议文章24篇，其中一作7篇。参编书3本，都不是一作，翻译出版书2本，也不是一作。
| S*********s
发帖数: 1963 | 16 claim了几项总共？
是不是claim超过3项了？太多了不好
【在 x**l 的大作中提到】
: 我是针对每一条都吹了一下啊
| k*****o
发帖数: 983 | |
|
