d**********0
发帖数: 1 | 1 今年2月份交的I140，4月份直接pp，5月份收到的RFE letter，遇到IO 0150的模板式回
复，承认了审稿和论文，但质疑了major significance of original contributions。
GS citation在file的时候是1300+，IO看了PL吗，怎么还提出thousands citation呢？
NSC真的是太恶心了。这点能够在回复中进行反驳吗？
35篇paper，大部分为一作或者通讯作者，review大约35-40，6封独立推荐信。
向各位前辈请教如何应对，非常感谢！引用现在涨到1500左右。回复的策略是否需要重
新写PL和提交更多的推荐信呢？
另外，现在的RFE回复是不是从90天延长到150天了呀？
You submitted letters of opinion and a record of your citatory history, but
the evidence, while demonstrating original contributions, does not
substantiate original contributions of "major significance" in a field whose
very top scientists (according to Google Scholar) have garnered citations
numbered well in the thousands.
To assist in determining whether your contributions are original and of
major significance in the fields, you may submit objective, independent
evidence that:
. people throughout the field currently consider your work important
. your contributions have provoked widespread public commentary in the field
. your publications have garnered a significant number of citations
. your work is being implemented by others, evidence such as:
.contracts with companies using your products
.licensed technology being used by others
.patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant in the field
And you may submit testimony and/or letters from experts discussing your
contributions of major significance. Please not that letters and testimonies
, if submitted, must provide as much detail as possible about your
contributions and must explain in detail how the contributions are original
(not merely replicating the work of others) and how they are of major
significance. General statements regarding the importance of your endeavors
which are not supported by documentary evidence are insufficient. |
