z****i
发帖数: 172 | 1 今天收到O1REF，主要是contribution不够，恳请版上大家能帮忙参考一下接下来的对
策和EB1A应该注意什么，万分感谢！
背景——化工，千老，j-1 waived 10-14过期
文章 12(jacs, nano lett, green chem, chemsuschem,chemcatchem, acb......)
引用 458(google s) 356(wos) 353(wos 他引) 382(scopus)
推荐信2封非独立 博士老板(兼任2个马普所所长)，博后老板(中牛,美国化工top10)
3封独立 意大利，美国2个(1个工程院院士，1个常春藤)
O1-学校律师(屎)，EB1A-chen law (EB1B只能走学校律师，感觉chen law仔细很多)
O1 RE - original contribution is insufficient
1.publications 不算contribution "A separate qualifying criterion exists to
acknowledge publication of scholarly articles. It is further noted that
publishing and perfom1ing peer review duties are considered job requirements
for all research scientists, and while the prestige of the joumals the
beneficiary has contributed to may mark him as a promising researcher, this
does not suffice to demonstrate how his contributions to the field of
heterogeneous catalysis have had a major impact on that field."
很明显学校律师没有吹期刊的排名，好歹这些杂志也有一两个top-ranked
2. citation只用了google scholar没有去掉自引。。。举例说推荐人(意大利)有7000
多他引。
这个主要怪我没有跟他要一份简单的CV。但是这个推荐人比我大25岁，他博士毕业几年
之内的引用不到200(当然20年前文章比现在少很多)，直接比有什么可比性啊。
3."These citations show that researchers are not making passing references
to Dr. XX's work, but are actively using his findings and techniques to
support their studies."
这个不算impact 和contributions吗?
4."The documentation of record does not contain sufficient information to
demonstrate that the beneficiary's contributions have reached a level of
significance which impacts the entire field. The 0-1 A classification is
restricted to beneficiaries who are part of the small percentage who have
reached the very top of their fields, and have sustained a record of
national or international acclaim for their accomplishments. Seeking to
reproduce promising results is a standard part of scientific investigation,
and does not, in and of itself, suffice to show that the beneficiary has
majorly impacted his field with multiple contributions. Given the fact that
the peers who wrote letters of support for the beneficiary have been cited,
recognized, and honored on far more occasions than the beneficiary has been,
it is not apparent that the beneficiary has reached the top of his field.
The totality of the evidence beyond the letters solicited for the instant
petition does not suffice to demonstrate that within his field, the
beneficiary's contributions are considered majorly significant because of
the in1pact theyhave had. You may still submit evidence to satisfY this
criterion."
我仔细对照了chen law写的pl,这里提到的每一条都清清楚楚的写了而且给了exhibit，
学校律师最终的cover letter我没看到，很难想象他是怎么写的。。。。。
另外学校律师还追加了"employment in a critical or essential capacity" 和"
remuneration"，我又不是faculty，这两条打死都不过啊。。。。。。
现在比较惨，不知道学校律师什么时候能够准备好response。Chen law马上就要file
140,就算过了10-14之前也拿不到ead。。。。。。 | w******n
发帖数: 13202 | 2 O1被学校律师害了，妥妥的，另外运气也被了点。
论证你的贡献重大和杰出，需要有具体的例子来说明你的工作被应用，被高度评价，而
且必须是在别人的文章中，而不是在推荐信中。
自己下功夫挖掘吧。
在版上多看看。
【在 z****i 的大作中提到】
: 今天收到O1REF，主要是contribution不够，恳请版上大家能帮忙参考一下接下来的对
: 策和EB1A应该注意什么，万分感谢！
: 背景——化工，千老，j-1 waived 10-14过期
: 文章 12(jacs, nano lett, green chem, chemsuschem,chemcatchem, acb......)
: 引用 458(google s) 356(wos) 353(wos 他引) 382(scopus)
: 推荐信2封非独立 博士老板(兼任2个马普所所长)，博后老板(中牛,美国化工top10)
: 3封独立 意大利，美国2个(1个工程院院士，1个常春藤)
: O1-学校律师(屎)，EB1A-chen law (EB1B只能走学校律师，感觉chen law仔细很多)
: O1 RE - original contribution is insufficient
: 1.publications 不算contribution "A separate qualifying criterion exists to
| N*****4
发帖数: 167 | | q*******2
发帖数: 454 | | c*********8
发帖数: 1327 | 5 你要是看到这几天我和另外一个台湾master发的O-1通过的帖子，你就更加深深滴理解
你学校的律师是什么了。。。
同意楼上说的
【在 z****i 的大作中提到】
: 今天收到O1REF，主要是contribution不够，恳请版上大家能帮忙参考一下接下来的对
: 策和EB1A应该注意什么，万分感谢！
: 背景——化工，千老，j-1 waived 10-14过期
: 文章 12(jacs, nano lett, green chem, chemsuschem,chemcatchem, acb......)
: 引用 458(google s) 356(wos) 353(wos 他引) 382(scopus)
: 推荐信2封非独立 博士老板(兼任2个马普所所长)，博后老板(中牛,美国化工top10)
: 3封独立 意大利，美国2个(1个工程院院士，1个常春藤)
: O1-学校律师(屎)，EB1A-chen law (EB1B只能走学校律师，感觉chen law仔细很多)
: O1 RE - original contribution is insufficient
: 1.publications 不算contribution "A separate qualifying criterion exists to
| c*********8
发帖数: 1327 | 6 不懂J1， 你这不能用学校的H1B过渡么
【在 z****i 的大作中提到】
: 今天收到O1REF，主要是contribution不够，恳请版上大家能帮忙参考一下接下来的对
: 策和EB1A应该注意什么，万分感谢！
: 背景——化工，千老，j-1 waived 10-14过期
: 文章 12(jacs, nano lett, green chem, chemsuschem,chemcatchem, acb......)
: 引用 458(google s) 356(wos) 353(wos 他引) 382(scopus)
: 推荐信2封非独立 博士老板(兼任2个马普所所长)，博后老板(中牛,美国化工top10)
: 3封独立 意大利，美国2个(1个工程院院士，1个常春藤)
: O1-学校律师(屎)，EB1A-chen law (EB1B只能走学校律师，感觉chen law仔细很多)
: O1 RE - original contribution is insufficient
: 1.publications 不算contribution "A separate qualifying criterion exists to
| C*********r
发帖数: 2671 | | a****y
发帖数: 545 | | z****i
发帖数: 172 | 9 多谢。
昨天看到学校律师写的cover letter，一口鲜血。。。。。。
丫儿在contributions这部分什么都没写，没有任何具体例子，只是引用了推荐信里的
几段话。丫儿还好意思说是adjudicator的问题。。。。。。
现在正在准备response letter，主要增加contributions
另外增加老板和Dean的推荐信claim critical role，或者联系senator看看能不能帮写
封信
哎。。。。。。
【在 w******n 的大作中提到】
: O1被学校律师害了，妥妥的，另外运气也被了点。
: 论证你的贡献重大和杰出，需要有具体的例子来说明你的工作被应用，被高度评价，而
: 且必须是在别人的文章中，而不是在推荐信中。
: 自己下功夫挖掘吧。
: 在版上多看看。
| z****i
发帖数: 172 | 10 3，4月份开始换title，学校HR拖拖拉拉到7月份才全办好然后说H1B需要7个月。。。。。
被这帮人害惨了。
【在 c*********8 的大作中提到】
: 不懂J1， 你这不能用学校的H1B过渡么
| | | z****i
发帖数: 172 | 11 多谢！
【在 C*********r 的大作中提到】
: bless
| z****i
发帖数: 172 | 12 审稿10
3条里审稿和publication都过了
【在 a****y 的大作中提到】
: 楼主审稿多少次没说啊
| s3
发帖数: 2270 | 13 你这条件EB1a足够了，O1应该水过
估计是被律师害了
【在 z****i 的大作中提到】
: 审稿10
: 3条里审稿和publication都过了
| S*****4
发帖数: 914 | 14 什么学校办H1B需要7个月？我去年办H1B,学校花了不到2周准备paper work，然后用了
PP,一周多就批了。
。。
【在 z****i 的大作中提到】
: 3，4月份开始换title，学校HR拖拖拉拉到7月份才全办好然后说H1B需要7个月。。。。。
: 被这帮人害惨了。
| c******1
发帖数: 40 | | z****i
发帖数: 172 | 16 周末针对RFE关于不认可贡献的地方准备了一些材料，添加一封推荐信
另外老板加Dean也写了推荐信强调critical and essential role
主要申诉，找io的语言漏洞，提供具体例子
1.“publishing and performing peer review duties are considered job
requirements for all research scientists, and while the prestige of the
journals the beneficiary has contributed to may mark him as a promising
researcher, this does not suffice to demonstrate how his contribution to the
field of heterogeneous catalysis have had a major impact on that field”
再一次强调文章是top ranked,增加AAO的例子证明publication的重要性
2.citation跟推荐人比较
做了一个简单的统计，列了11个全美化工排名前10的学校里跟我方向类似的助理/副教
授在他们拿到教职之前的引用次数（这个比较有点无耻。。。。。。）。放了油灯图。
另外加了引用里涉及的学科等。
3.”Seeking to reproduce promising results is a standard part of scientific
investigation, and does not, in and of itself, suffice to show that the
beneficiary has majorly impacted his field with multiple contributions.“
这个觉得是在侮辱整个科学系统。It is true that every scientific investigation
should be reproducible to keep the accuracy and precision, but publishing
reproduced results is called plagiarism, no matter the original work was
cited or not. The core value of scientific publications is the reporting
original empirical and theoretical works, thus the originality, novelty and
significance of a scientific report have been recognized as the most
important aspects to be accepted in any academic journal.
另外找了个别的学校的系主任给写推荐信，强调论文的原创性，新颖性和重要性等等
4.”Given the fact that the peers who wrote letters of support for the
beneficiary have been cited, recognized, and honored on far more occasions
than the beneficiary has been...... The totality of the evidence beyond the
letters solicited for the instant petition does not suffice to demonstrate
that within his field, the beneficiary's contributions are considered
majorly significant because of the impact they have had.“
这个加了几个具体例子说明我的工作是怎么被引用的，结合新的推荐信加老板和dean的
推荐信一起强调贡献
暂时就准备这些，都发给学校律师了，看他怎么写了。。。。。。
周末看了她写的cover letter，院士的title没提也就罢了，丫儿连院士的推荐信一句
都没用，只是放在目录里了。。。。。。
在contribution的claim里只是简单说了几句话，谁谁谁认为。。。贴了推荐信的原话
。。。
现在越想越生气。。。。。。
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
O-1 REF，有效身份10-14-2016过期，I-140下周file
这意味着我需要赶在10-14之前交485？
或者140/485一起提交，或者140 pending提交485
不然的话，只能等到O-1 approved才能交485？
真的被学校律师害死了。。。。。。
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
今天收到O1REF，主要是contribution不够，恳请版上大家能帮忙参考一下接下来的对
策和EB1A应该注意什么，万分感谢！
背景——化工，千老，j-1 waived 10-14过期
文章 12(jacs, nano lett, green chem, chemsuschem,chemcatchem, acb......)
引用 458(google s) 356(wos) 353(wos 他引) 382(scopus)
推荐信2封非独立 博士老板(兼任2个马普所所长)，博后老板(中牛,美国化工top10)
3封独立 意大利，美国2个(1个工程院院士，1个常春藤)
O1-学校律师(屎)，EB1A-chen law (EB1B只能走学校律师，感觉chen law仔细很多)
O1 RE - original contribution is insufficient
1.publications 不算contribution "A separate qualifying criterion exists to
acknowledge publication of scholarly articles. It is further noted that
publishing and perfom1ing peer review duties are considered job requirements
for all research scientists, and while the prestige of the joumals the
beneficiary has contributed to may mark him as a promising researcher, this
does not suffice to demonstrate how his contributions to the field of
heterogeneous catalysis have had a major impact on that field."
很明显学校律师没有吹期刊的排名，好歹这些杂志也有一两个top-ranked
2. citation只用了google scholar没有去掉自引。。。举例说推荐人(意大利)有7000
多他引。
这个主要怪我没有跟他要一份简单的CV。但是这个推荐人比我大25岁，他博士毕业几年
之内的引用不到200(当然20年前文章比现在少很多)，直接比有什么可比性啊。
3."These citations show that researchers are not making passing references
to Dr. XX's work, but are actively using his findings and techniques to
support their studies."
这个不算impact 和contributions吗?
4."The documentation of record does not contain sufficient information to
demonstrate that the beneficiary's contributions have reached a level of
significance which impacts the entire field. The 0-1 A classification is
restricted to beneficiaries who are part of the small percentage who have
reached the very top of their fields, and have sustained a record of
national or international acclaim for their accomplishments. Seeking to
reproduce promising results is a standard part of scientific investigation,
and does not, in and of itself, suffice to show that the beneficiary has
majorly impacted his field with multiple contributions. Given the fact that
the peers who wrote letters of support for the beneficiary have been cited,
recognized, and honored on far more occasions than the beneficiary has been,
it is not apparent that the beneficiary has reached the top of his field.
The totality of the evidence beyond the letters solicited for the instant
petition does not suffice to demonstrate that within his field, the
beneficiary's contributions are considered majorly significant because of
the in1pact theyhave had. You may still submit evidence to satisfY this
criterion."
我仔细对照了chen law写的pl,这里提到的每一条都清清楚楚的写了而且给了exhibit，
学校律师最终的cover letter我没看到，很难想象他是怎么写的。。。。。
另外学校律师还追加了"employment in a critical or essential capacity" 和"
remuneration"，我又不是faculty，这两条打死都不过啊。。。。。。
现在比较惨，不知道学校律师什么时候能够准备好response。Chen law马上就要file
140,就算过了10-14之前也拿不到ead。。。。。。
希望我的例子会给后来人点帮助 | a****y
发帖数: 545 | 17 楼主j1转o1要出境激活吧。化学类的是不是要check一个月才给签证？ | d*******u
发帖数: 5337 | |
|
