f*****g
发帖数: 101 | 1 background:
Physics
20 journal publications and 5 conference proceedings (11 first authored)
1 patent
total citations: google scholar 360+, ISI 300+
Reviews: 14times, 2 for APL, 3 for PRL
claim 老三样：authorship, contributions and review
RFE:
(iv) Evidence of the beneficiary's participation, as a judge of the work of
others
this criterion has been met by the petitioner's submission of evidence
(v) Evidence of the beneficiary's original scientific, scholarly, artistic..
..contributions of major significance in the field.
the petitioner has provided opinion letters by experts in the beneficiary's
field, evidence of the beneficiary's patent application, and evidence
establishing moderate citation of the beneficiary's work. However, the
criterion has not been met because the evidence submitted does not show the
beneficiary's contributions are considered to be of major significance in
the field of endeavor. To assist in determining whether the beneficiary's
contributions satisfy this criterion, the petioner may submit:
.objective documentary evidence of the significance of the beneficiary's
contribution to the field.
.additional testimony and or support letters from experts which discuss the
beneficiary's contributions of major significance.
.evidence of the beneficiary's work being implemented by others. possible
evidence may include but is not limited to:
contracts with companies using the beneficiary's products
licenced technology being used by others;
patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant to the field
Note:.....
(vi) Evidence of the beneficiary's authorship of scholarly articles in the
field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media
this criterion has been met by the petitioner's submission of evidence that
the beneficiary authored scholarly article published in academic journals in
the field.
然后是结论，提到两步法的判决。 |
K*N
发帖数: 7494 | 2 这，这，这IO脑袋是被驴踢了吗？这么强还RFE？ |
s**********g
发帖数: 551 | 3 这么强的case也rfe？真是没天理。bless |
b*******e
发帖数: 24532 | 4 这个通常是推荐信没突出你的significant impact造成的.
of
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: background:
: Physics
: 20 journal publications and 5 conference proceedings (11 first authored)
: 1 patent
: total citations: google scholar 360+, ISI 300+
: Reviews: 14times, 2 for APL, 3 for PRL
: claim 老三样：authorship, contributions and review
: RFE:
: (iv) Evidence of the beneficiary's participation, as a judge of the work of
: others
|
e******r
发帖数: 9977 | 5 cft，挺强的case。不是IO太bt，就是包装没过关。 |
n******e
发帖数: 1248 | |
l***i
发帖数: 2542 | |
I********r
发帖数: 747 | |
D*********Y
发帖数: 3382 | 9 "然后是结论，提到两步法的判决。"--what's this?
I am in the process of responding the RFE. Somehow I feel very confident but
don't know why. LOL. I am also in the Physics field. You may search my
posts where I asked for relative information for RFE. |
f*****g
发帖数: 101 | 10 谢谢！
推荐信都是我自己写，然后找教授们签名的。可能在推荐信组织的不好。 像大蜜说的
，没有突出original 和significance。
我想还要再补充2到3封推荐信。好好组织，突出重点。
【在 b*******e 的大作中提到】
: 这个通常是推荐信没突出你的significant impact造成的.
:
: of
|
|
|
f*****g
发帖数: 101 | 11 谢谢！
推荐信都是我自己写，然后找教授们签名的。可能在推荐信组织的不好。 像大蜜说的
，没有突出original 和significance。
我想还要再补充2到3封推荐信。好好组织，突出重点。
【在 b*******e 的大作中提到】
: 这个通常是推荐信没突出你的significant impact造成的.
:
: of
|
f*****g
发帖数: 101 | 12 IO在conclusion里提到
In conlusion, when ultimately making a final decision regarding eligibility,
USCIS will:
. First evaluate the evidence submitted by the petitioner to determine which
regulatory critia the beneficiary meets in part one, if necessary.
. Evaluate the evidence together in its entirely to make a final merits
determination of whether or not the petitioner, by a preponderance of the
evidence, has demonstrated that the beneficiary has sustained national or
international acclaim and that the beneficiary's achievements have been
recognized in the field fo expertise, indicating that the beneficiary is one
of that small percentage who has risen to the very top of the field of
endeavor.
因为我的申请时DIY，可能推荐信和contribution组织的不好。
在我的contribution里，我列出我四篇引用率很高的文章，对它们的引用进行分析。
也讨论了我最近发表的工作，给出了审稿人的肯定的意见。
but
【在 D*********Y 的大作中提到】
: "然后是结论，提到两步法的判决。"--what's this?
: I am in the process of responding the RFE. Somehow I feel very confident but
: don't know why. LOL. I am also in the Physics field. You may search my
: posts where I asked for relative information for RFE.
|
d*******n
发帖数: 1339 | 13 真是牛背景
一定是contribution没组织好
我发现很多很牛的人都彼RFE了
是不是多少有点大意
不像我们这种整天惶惶掘地三尺挖贡献的屌丝反而可能过
of
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: background:
: Physics
: 20 journal publications and 5 conference proceedings (11 first authored)
: 1 patent
: total citations: google scholar 360+, ISI 300+
: Reviews: 14times, 2 for APL, 3 for PRL
: claim 老三样：authorship, contributions and review
: RFE:
: (iv) Evidence of the beneficiary's participation, as a judge of the work of
: others
|
h*********2
发帖数: 397 | 14 牛人，好好回复，一定能过的
Big Bless |
s****s
发帖数: 58 | 15 我觉的是review 的问题，14个review有点少，保险的是 review >20
第二，editor的推荐信是不是不够strong? 我准备了3-4个editor的推荐信，用了两个
最好的
没有ref过，看看版上其他人的经验吧
of
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: background:
: Physics
: 20 journal publications and 5 conference proceedings (11 first authored)
: 1 patent
: total citations: google scholar 360+, ISI 300+
: Reviews: 14times, 2 for APL, 3 for PRL
: claim 老三样：authorship, contributions and review
: RFE:
: (iv) Evidence of the beneficiary's participation, as a judge of the work of
: others
|
f*****g
发帖数: 101 | 16 有可能是这个原因， 不知道哪里可以找到editor推荐信的模板。 这次我想补充editor
的推荐信。
谢谢
【在 s****s 的大作中提到】
: 我觉的是review 的问题，14个review有点少，保险的是 review >20
: 第二，editor的推荐信是不是不够strong? 我准备了3-4个editor的推荐信，用了两个
: 最好的
: 没有ref过，看看版上其他人的经验吧
:
: of
|
