w******o
发帖数: 578 | 1 citation:112
paper: 9
review: 34
二进宫，0242 NOID. 那个律师比较擅长对付0242？ |
d*******u
发帖数: 5337 | |
w******o
发帖数: 578 | 3 Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as
a judge of the work of other in the same or an allied field of ......:
The record establishes the beneficiary has judged the work of others by
completing 34 peer reviews. The record does not contain the criteria which
was used when determining how one become a part of the peer review team.
Please submit a documentation that indicates the responsibilities of a head
and a member and how one qualifies for each title. I should be noted that
peer review is routine in the field; not inclusive of extraordinary ability.
The evidence must clearly demonstrate that the beneficiary has sustained
national or international acclaim. Without evidence that sets the
beneficiary apart from others in the field, the USCIS cannot conclude the
beneficiary meets the criteria. The record shows the beneficiary has served
as a reviewer. however, this is not sufficient to meet the criterion.
Evidence of alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, ....
contribution of major significance in the field.
You have provided
a) Publications
b) Nine letters of recommendation
c) Oral presentation
d) Peer reivewer
This criterion has not been met because the evidence submitted does not show
that the beneficiary's contributions are considered to be of major
significance in the field of endeavor. The submitted letters of support
attest to the fact that the beneficiary has worked on projects in the field
and has mad scientific discovers during the course of research work or
during the course of research related projects in the field。Rather, the
discoveries must be major and significant to the entire field of the
endeavor .
Letters of recommendation and requests written by experts may be helpful.;
however, the major significance of the beneficiary's work must be
demonstrated by preexisting, independent, and objective evidence. Letters of
support and requests for work alone generally may not sufficient to meet
the criterion. Letters, though not without weight, cannot from the
cornerstone of a successful extraordinary ability claim. USCIS may, in its
discretion, use such letters as advisory options submitted by expert
witnesses. However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final
determination of the alien's eligibility. Without documentation showing that
the beneficiary's work has made original contributions or major
significance to the field, uscis cannot conclude this criterion has been met.
while this shows that the beneficiary's work has had some impact on the
field of endeavor, this is not indicative that the beneficiary is
outstanding in the specific academic area. The record contains evidence that
the beneficiary has presented research at conferences. However,
presentations appear to be common place in an academia career.
Further, the mere publication of research is not in itself conclusive of
outstanding research. The beneficiary may have original contributions in his
field, but such contribuitons are expected in his field and do not separate
him form the rest. USCIS has determined the evidence regarding the
beneficiary's conference participation falls short of establishing
contributions of major significance in the field. Numerous conference
presentations are given each year at multiple conference all around the
world. The record does not contain any evidence to suggest the beneficiary's
presentations, posters, or participation has risen above all the other
presentations to establish contributions of major significance.
Evidence of the alien's authorship
The record shows the beneficiary has met the plain language of this
criterion. Pleas explain the significance of the publications...... |
p******8
发帖数: 516 | 4 bless
as
head
ability.
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as
: a judge of the work of other in the same or an allied field of ......:
: The record establishes the beneficiary has judged the work of others by
: completing 34 peer reviews. The record does not contain the criteria which
: was used when determining how one become a part of the peer review team.
: Please submit a documentation that indicates the responsibilities of a head
: and a member and how one qualifies for each title. I should be noted that
: peer review is routine in the field; not inclusive of extraordinary ability.
: The evidence must clearly demonstrate that the beneficiary has sustained
: national or international acclaim. Without evidence that sets the
|
r**********t
发帖数: 247 | |
x****z
发帖数: 327 | 6 bless
几个数据看来不太乐观
DIY的吗？现在现找律师恐怕难有人接，不如自己准备
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: citation:112
: paper: 9
: review: 34
: 二进宫，0242 NOID. 那个律师比较擅长对付0242？
|
s****n
发帖数: 171 | 7 这个很明显是Petition letter写的不够好，证据摆的不够征服IO.要重新写PL。 |
W*F
发帖数: 3941 | 8 Petition letter 是自己写的吗？
你这个恢复得当还是能过。 |
W*F
发帖数: 3941 | 9 似乎三项都质疑了，
第一项审稿，
第二项significance of contribution, 贡献不突出。
第三项publication通过没？ |
J*d
发帖数: 433 | 10 这个IO是新手，很容易反驳：
1。Review: 找一两个杂志的主编，求他们帮你写一封信说明他们杂志挑选reviewer
是极其严格的，只有最顶尖的权威科学家才能成为杂志的reviewer。你要给他们把
信的草稿写好，在信里把这个杂志吹到天上去，说这个杂志怎么好怎么好，然后说
他们因为这么好，所以挑选reviewer的时候，才极其严格，他们最终挑选你，也正
是因为你是nationally and internationally recognized expert才挑选你做他们
的reviewer的。这些杂志的主编，看你把他们杂志吹到天上去了，非常乐意给你提
供这封证明信。世界上没有哪个杂志的主编会说自己的杂志是垃圾，自己挑选的
reviewer是垃圾，他们只会说自己的杂志是最好的，自己挑选的reviewer也是最好的。
2。Contribution：把你的亮点，再重新包装一下，再追加一封信，然后再教育一下
这个新手IO一个移民局的内部规定（见下），他就会老实了，记住一定要照抄下面
这一段话，不要乱改啊：
The standard of proof applied in most administrative immigration proceedings
is the “preponderance of the evidence” standard. Thus, even if the
director has some doubt as to the truth, if the petitioner submits relevant,
probative, and credible evidence that leads the director to believe that
the claim is “probably true” or “more likely than not,” the applicant or
petitioner has satisfied the standard of proof. See U.S. v. Cardozo-Fonseca
, 480 U.S. 421 (1987) (defining “more likely than not” as a greater than
50 percent probability of something occurring). If the director can
articulate a material doubt, it is appropriate for the director to either
request additional evidence or, if that doubt leads the director to believe
that the claim is probably not true, deny the application or petition.
Exhibit XXX (Adjudicator’s Field Manual § 11.1(c)).
Consequently, I am not required to dispel all doubt concerning the
level of my national and international recognition. I am only required
to show that it is“more likely than not” that I am recognized
internationally as an extraordinary scientist in my academic field.
And this, I have already done.
3。Publication：这个更容易反驳了：这个你只要证明你的Publication是正规杂志
就行了，你不需要证明每篇文章都是最顶尖的。这个你需要把这些杂志的网页介绍
都打印一下，说明这些杂志是经过评审，并且有很多读者的。你不需要证明这些
杂志是顶尖的。专门有一个移民局的AAO判例，说明这个条件怎么能满足。你去查一
下这个AAO案例，把那个案例的移民局的判例“一个字一个字”地抄下来给这个新手
IO上一课，他就老实了。你只要证明这些文章是IN SCHOLARLY JOURNALS WITH
INTERNATIONAL CIRCULATION IN THE ACADEMIC FIELD。不需要证明他们是top的。
as
head
ability.
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as
: a judge of the work of other in the same or an allied field of ......:
: The record establishes the beneficiary has judged the work of others by
: completing 34 peer reviews. The record does not contain the criteria which
: was used when determining how one become a part of the peer review team.
: Please submit a documentation that indicates the responsibilities of a head
: and a member and how one qualifies for each title. I should be noted that
: peer review is routine in the field; not inclusive of extraordinary ability.
: The evidence must clearly demonstrate that the beneficiary has sustained
: national or international acclaim. Without evidence that sets the
|
|
|
w******o
发帖数: 578 | 11 谢谢这么详细的建议！
【在 J*d 的大作中提到】
: 这个IO是新手，很容易反驳：
: 1。Review: 找一两个杂志的主编，求他们帮你写一封信说明他们杂志挑选reviewer
: 是极其严格的，只有最顶尖的权威科学家才能成为杂志的reviewer。你要给他们把
: 信的草稿写好，在信里把这个杂志吹到天上去，说这个杂志怎么好怎么好，然后说
: 他们因为这么好，所以挑选reviewer的时候，才极其严格，他们最终挑选你，也正
: 是因为你是nationally and internationally recognized expert才挑选你做他们
: 的reviewer的。这些杂志的主编，看你把他们杂志吹到天上去了，非常乐意给你提
: 供这封证明信。世界上没有哪个杂志的主编会说自己的杂志是垃圾，自己挑选的
: reviewer是垃圾，他们只会说自己的杂志是最好的，自己挑选的reviewer也是最好的。
: 2。Contribution：把你的亮点，再重新包装一下，再追加一封信，然后再教育一下
|
b*******h
发帖数: 94 | 12 不要误导人啊。。
0242是杀手不是新手啊。。。
【在 J*d 的大作中提到】
: 这个IO是新手，很容易反驳：
: 1。Review: 找一两个杂志的主编，求他们帮你写一封信说明他们杂志挑选reviewer
: 是极其严格的，只有最顶尖的权威科学家才能成为杂志的reviewer。你要给他们把
: 信的草稿写好，在信里把这个杂志吹到天上去，说这个杂志怎么好怎么好，然后说
: 他们因为这么好，所以挑选reviewer的时候，才极其严格，他们最终挑选你，也正
: 是因为你是nationally and internationally recognized expert才挑选你做他们
: 的reviewer的。这些杂志的主编，看你把他们杂志吹到天上去了，非常乐意给你提
: 供这封证明信。世界上没有哪个杂志的主编会说自己的杂志是垃圾，自己挑选的
: reviewer是垃圾，他们只会说自己的杂志是最好的，自己挑选的reviewer也是最好的。
: 2。Contribution：把你的亮点，再重新包装一下，再追加一封信，然后再教育一下
|
L**i
发帖数: 22365 | 13 总结起来一句话，contribution挖的还是不够 |
d*******u
发帖数: 5337 | 14 对，要强调研究对行业的影响重大，而不是反复说自己的文章多好，有多少引用。 |
d*******u
发帖数: 5337 | 15 对，要强调研究对行业的影响重大，而不是反复说自己的文章多好，有多少引用。 |
w******o
发帖数: 578 | 16 citation:112
paper: 9
review: 34
二进宫，0242 NOID. 那个律师比较擅长对付0242？ |
d*******u
发帖数: 5337 | |
w******o
发帖数: 578 | 18 Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as
a judge of the work of other in the same or an allied field of ......:
The record establishes the beneficiary has judged the work of others by
completing 34 peer reviews. The record does not contain the criteria which
was used when determining how one become a part of the peer review team.
Please submit a documentation that indicates the responsibilities of a head
and a member and how one qualifies for each title. I should be noted that
peer review is routine in the field; not inclusive of extraordinary ability.
The evidence must clearly demonstrate that the beneficiary has sustained
national or international acclaim. Without evidence that sets the
beneficiary apart from others in the field, the USCIS cannot conclude the
beneficiary meets the criteria. The record shows the beneficiary has served
as a reviewer. however, this is not sufficient to meet the criterion.
Evidence of alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, ....
contribution of major significance in the field.
You have provided
a) Publications
b) Nine letters of recommendation
c) Oral presentation
d) Peer reivewer
This criterion has not been met because the evidence submitted does not show
that the beneficiary's contributions are considered to be of major
significance in the field of endeavor. The submitted letters of support
attest to the fact that the beneficiary has worked on projects in the field
and has mad scientific discovers during the course of research work or
during the course of research related projects in the field。Rather, the
discoveries must be major and significant to the entire field of the
endeavor .
Letters of recommendation and requests written by experts may be helpful.;
however, the major significance of the beneficiary's work must be
demonstrated by preexisting, independent, and objective evidence. Letters of
support and requests for work alone generally may not sufficient to meet
the criterion. Letters, though not without weight, cannot from the
cornerstone of a successful extraordinary ability claim. USCIS may, in its
discretion, use such letters as advisory options submitted by expert
witnesses. However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final
determination of the alien's eligibility. Without documentation showing that
the beneficiary's work has made original contributions or major
significance to the field, uscis cannot conclude this criterion has been met.
while this shows that the beneficiary's work has had some impact on the
field of endeavor, this is not indicative that the beneficiary is
outstanding in the specific academic area. The record contains evidence that
the beneficiary has presented research at conferences. However,
presentations appear to be common place in an academia career.
Further, the mere publication of research is not in itself conclusive of
outstanding research. The beneficiary may have original contributions in his
field, but such contribuitons are expected in his field and do not separate
him form the rest. USCIS has determined the evidence regarding the
beneficiary's conference participation falls short of establishing
contributions of major significance in the field. Numerous conference
presentations are given each year at multiple conference all around the
world. The record does not contain any evidence to suggest the beneficiary's
presentations, posters, or participation has risen above all the other
presentations to establish contributions of major significance.
Evidence of the alien's authorship
The record shows the beneficiary has met the plain language of this
criterion. Pleas explain the significance of the publications...... |
p******8
发帖数: 516 | 19 bless
as
head
ability.
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as
: a judge of the work of other in the same or an allied field of ......:
: The record establishes the beneficiary has judged the work of others by
: completing 34 peer reviews. The record does not contain the criteria which
: was used when determining how one become a part of the peer review team.
: Please submit a documentation that indicates the responsibilities of a head
: and a member and how one qualifies for each title. I should be noted that
: peer review is routine in the field; not inclusive of extraordinary ability.
: The evidence must clearly demonstrate that the beneficiary has sustained
: national or international acclaim. Without evidence that sets the
|
r**********t
发帖数: 247 | |
|
|
x****z
发帖数: 327 | 21 bless
几个数据看来不太乐观
DIY的吗？现在现找律师恐怕难有人接，不如自己准备
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: citation:112
: paper: 9
: review: 34
: 二进宫，0242 NOID. 那个律师比较擅长对付0242？
|
s****n
发帖数: 171 | 22 这个很明显是Petition letter写的不够好，证据摆的不够征服IO.要重新写PL。 |
W*F
发帖数: 3941 | 23 Petition letter 是自己写的吗？
你这个恢复得当还是能过。 |
W*F
发帖数: 3941 | 24 似乎三项都质疑了，
第一项审稿，
第二项significance of contribution, 贡献不突出。
第三项publication通过没？ |
J*d
发帖数: 433 | 25 这个IO是新手，很容易反驳：
1。Review: 找一两个杂志的主编，求他们帮你写一封信说明他们杂志挑选reviewer
是极其严格的，只有最顶尖的权威科学家才能成为杂志的reviewer。你要给他们把
信的草稿写好，在信里把这个杂志吹到天上去，说这个杂志怎么好怎么好，然后说
他们因为这么好，所以挑选reviewer的时候，才极其严格，他们最终挑选你，也正
是因为你是nationally and internationally recognized expert才挑选你做他们
的reviewer的。这些杂志的主编，看你把他们杂志吹到天上去了，非常乐意给你提
供这封证明信。世界上没有哪个杂志的主编会说自己的杂志是垃圾，自己挑选的
reviewer是垃圾，他们只会说自己的杂志是最好的，自己挑选的reviewer也是最好的。
2。Contribution：把你的亮点，再重新包装一下，再追加一封信，然后再教育一下
这个新手IO一个移民局的内部规定（见下），他就会老实了，记住一定要照抄下面
这一段话，不要乱改啊：
The standard of proof applied in most administrative immigration proceedings
is the “preponderance of the evidence” standard. Thus, even if the
director has some doubt as to the truth, if the petitioner submits relevant,
probative, and credible evidence that leads the director to believe that
the claim is “probably true” or “more likely than not,” the applicant or
petitioner has satisfied the standard of proof. See U.S. v. Cardozo-Fonseca
, 480 U.S. 421 (1987) (defining “more likely than not” as a greater than
50 percent probability of something occurring). If the director can
articulate a material doubt, it is appropriate for the director to either
request additional evidence or, if that doubt leads the director to believe
that the claim is probably not true, deny the application or petition.
Exhibit XXX (Adjudicator’s Field Manual § 11.1(c)).
Consequently, I am not required to dispel all doubt concerning the
level of my national and international recognition. I am only required
to show that it is“more likely than not” that I am recognized
internationally as an extraordinary scientist in my academic field.
And this, I have already done.
3。Publication：这个更容易反驳了：这个你只要证明你的Publication是正规杂志
就行了，你不需要证明每篇文章都是最顶尖的。这个你需要把这些杂志的网页介绍
都打印一下，说明这些杂志是经过评审，并且有很多读者的。你不需要证明这些
杂志是顶尖的。专门有一个移民局的AAO判例，说明这个条件怎么能满足。你去查一
下这个AAO案例，把那个案例的移民局的判例“一个字一个字”地抄下来给这个新手
IO上一课，他就老实了。你只要证明这些文章是IN SCHOLARLY JOURNALS WITH
INTERNATIONAL CIRCULATION IN THE ACADEMIC FIELD。不需要证明他们是top的。
as
head
ability.
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: Evidence of the alien's participation, either individually or on a panel, as
: a judge of the work of other in the same or an allied field of ......:
: The record establishes the beneficiary has judged the work of others by
: completing 34 peer reviews. The record does not contain the criteria which
: was used when determining how one become a part of the peer review team.
: Please submit a documentation that indicates the responsibilities of a head
: and a member and how one qualifies for each title. I should be noted that
: peer review is routine in the field; not inclusive of extraordinary ability.
: The evidence must clearly demonstrate that the beneficiary has sustained
: national or international acclaim. Without evidence that sets the
|
w******o
发帖数: 578 | 26 谢谢这么详细的建议！
【在 J*d 的大作中提到】
: 这个IO是新手，很容易反驳：
: 1。Review: 找一两个杂志的主编，求他们帮你写一封信说明他们杂志挑选reviewer
: 是极其严格的，只有最顶尖的权威科学家才能成为杂志的reviewer。你要给他们把
: 信的草稿写好，在信里把这个杂志吹到天上去，说这个杂志怎么好怎么好，然后说
: 他们因为这么好，所以挑选reviewer的时候，才极其严格，他们最终挑选你，也正
: 是因为你是nationally and internationally recognized expert才挑选你做他们
: 的reviewer的。这些杂志的主编，看你把他们杂志吹到天上去了，非常乐意给你提
: 供这封证明信。世界上没有哪个杂志的主编会说自己的杂志是垃圾，自己挑选的
: reviewer是垃圾，他们只会说自己的杂志是最好的，自己挑选的reviewer也是最好的。
: 2。Contribution：把你的亮点，再重新包装一下，再追加一封信，然后再教育一下
|
b*******h
发帖数: 94 | 27 不要误导人啊。。
0242是杀手不是新手啊。。。
【在 J*d 的大作中提到】
: 这个IO是新手，很容易反驳：
: 1。Review: 找一两个杂志的主编，求他们帮你写一封信说明他们杂志挑选reviewer
: 是极其严格的，只有最顶尖的权威科学家才能成为杂志的reviewer。你要给他们把
: 信的草稿写好，在信里把这个杂志吹到天上去，说这个杂志怎么好怎么好，然后说
: 他们因为这么好，所以挑选reviewer的时候，才极其严格，他们最终挑选你，也正
: 是因为你是nationally and internationally recognized expert才挑选你做他们
: 的reviewer的。这些杂志的主编，看你把他们杂志吹到天上去了，非常乐意给你提
: 供这封证明信。世界上没有哪个杂志的主编会说自己的杂志是垃圾，自己挑选的
: reviewer是垃圾，他们只会说自己的杂志是最好的，自己挑选的reviewer也是最好的。
: 2。Contribution：把你的亮点，再重新包装一下，再追加一封信，然后再教育一下
|
L**i
发帖数: 22365 | 28 总结起来一句话，contribution挖的还是不够 |
d*******u
发帖数: 5337 | 29 对，要强调研究对行业的影响重大，而不是反复说自己的文章多好，有多少引用。 |
d*******u
发帖数: 5337 | 30 对，要强调研究对行业的影响重大，而不是反复说自己的文章多好，有多少引用。 |
|
|
j*******1
发帖数: 6 | 31 最后结果不知道如何呢？
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: citation:112
: paper: 9
: review: 34
: 二进宫，0242 NOID. 那个律师比较擅长对付0242？
|
M*****8
发帖数: 49 | 32 请问是1A还是1B? Bless!
【在 w******o 的大作中提到】
: citation:112
: paper: 9
: review: 34
: 二进宫，0242 NOID. 那个律师比较擅长对付0242？
|
u***i
发帖数: 22 | |
