EB1A RFE 回复问题，附背景。 - Immigration版

本页内容为未名空间相应帖子的节选和存档，一周内的贴子最多显示50字，超过一周显示500字访问原贴

Immigration版 - EB1A RFE 回复问题，附背景。

相关主题
● 关于PL的疑问寻求意见	● which citation search tool is good?
● 关于citation，大家一般上交哪个， google schoolar or web of science？	● EB1A PP or Non-PP
● 打印GOOGLE SCHOOLAR CITATION，好几页的引用怎么打印	● 牛引用的定义:至少3000引用,每篇200个引用吧!
● Eb1a 被RFE了	● 问个ResearcherID的问题
● RL咋写出major significance?	● 弱EB1A求评估
● NIW 需要多大程度依赖律师	● EB2-NIW 背景还是太弱？
● 请大家帮忙看看申EB-1A有可能吗	● 请大家看一下够上eb1a吗
● 恳求某 AAO 决定书（有包子答谢）	● nsc 140没遇到杀手！顺利通过！

相关话题的讨论汇总
话题: citation话题: petitioner话题: citations话题: evidence

进入Immigration版参与讨论

(共1页)

a***r
发帖数: 146

我的Case 的背景是这样的：
Physics PHD, 6 papers (2 PRE, 1 PRL, 2 Plos One, 1 J. Of Cond Matt ) 5 first
author, 63 (around 60 are independent citation ) citation according to
google scholar.
我收到如下的RFE：
Evidence of the petitioner's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, or
business_related contributions of major significance in the field:
Counsel has submitted several letters of testimony from others in the
petitioner's field. while the writers describe the field and its importance,
they offer no detail about how the petitioner's own work as been of major
significance of the field beyond the institutions who have employed him.
For example, ... 列举了我的两封推荐信，说the writers did not describe in any
detail how the petitioner's work has been of major importance to
institutions beyond those that have employed him.
我想再补上两封independent的推荐信，除此之外也想不出还有什么方法？
In addition, the record includes several research articles that have cited
the petitioner's collaborative research, showing a moderate citation level,
however it is not apparent that these represent the total number of
citations the petitioner's work has received. The petitioner's own list of
citations is insufficient as it is not primary evidence such as an online
citation index.
不知道最后一句话是什么意思? 难道google scholar 打出的citation list 不够权威
？在其它网站找到我的citation要少一些...
The petitioner should also submit concise evidence of the number of
independent citations his published work has received, such as screen prints
of an online citation index. The evidence must identify citing authors in
order to distinguish independent citations from self citations by the
petitioner and his collaborators.
如何强调independent citation? 可不可以打出google scholar citation list, 然后
highlight citing author以及他们的institutions?
现在没什么头绪，觉得很受挫折，很感谢任何建议。
谢谢

b*******e
发帖数: 24532

这些意思就是说你的RL 写得很糟糕. 这种情况都是因为RL里面使用太多的general
description所致. 可以参看genegun老枪的文章关于如何写RL. Kathy的文章里面也提
及了RL一些框架,供参考.

first
importance,

【在 a***r 的大作中提到】

: 我的Case 的背景是这样的：
: Physics PHD, 6 papers (2 PRE, 1 PRL, 2 Plos One, 1 J. Of Cond Matt ) 5 first
: author, 63 (around 60 are independent citation ) citation according to
: google scholar.
: 我收到如下的RFE：
: Evidence of the petitioner's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, or
: business_related contributions of major significance in the field:
: Counsel has submitted several letters of testimony from others in the
: petitioner's field. while the writers describe the field and its importance,
: they offer no detail about how the petitioner's own work as been of major

r******y
发帖数: 21907

citation少你是不是没强调top percentage？我inde的也不多，不过加上了中文的凑数
，不知道会不会也被REF..

first
importance,

【在 a***r 的大作中提到】

b*******e
发帖数: 24532

是RFE, not REF,

【在 r******y 的大作中提到】

: citation少你是不是没强调top percentage？我inde的也不多，不过加上了中文的凑数
: ，不知道会不会也被REF..
:
: first
: importance,

r******y
发帖数: 21907

噢，打错了，呵呵。。。

【在 b*******e 的大作中提到】

: 是RFE, not REF,

i******t
发帖数: 22541

蜜蜂兄去开事务所吧比他们律师便宜些
光吃班上的就可以了

【在 b*******e 的大作中提到】

: 是RFE, not REF,

b*******e
发帖数: 24532

呵呵

【在 r******y 的大作中提到】

: 噢，打错了，呵呵。。。

b*******e
发帖数: 24532

挨,现在我只想攒人品阿,如果再过两星期还没批,我就准备义务帮大家改RL, 改到批为
止,呵呵

【在 i******t 的大作中提到】

: 蜜蜂兄去开事务所吧比他们律师便宜些
: 光吃班上的就可以了

a***r
发帖数: 146