关于是否是第一作者文章被引：一个有用的AAO案例# Immigration - 落地生根
d*y
1 楼
感谢这两天几个同学提供的AAO链接，
读了好几个，发现了一个有用的案子：
如果有同学因为IO说自己的引用不是第一作者文章，可以使用下面的判例。
In support of the preceding experts' statements, the petitioner
submitted documentation showing
hundreds of independent cites to his published findings. In addressing
this evidence, the director's
decision only considered cites to articles for which the petitioner was
identified as "first author."
The director did not consider the citation history for the numerous
other articles coauthored by the
petitioner
...
As modern scientific research endeavors routinely involve collaborative
efforts, we
find no statutory, regulatory, precedential, or evidentiary basis to
conclude that USCIS should not
assign weight to collaborative scientific research such as the
petitioner's. It could be argued that the
director was simply seeking stronger evidence of the petitioner's
prominent role in his research
studies. However, statements from the petitioner's first-author
collaborators submitted on appeal
confirm that he played an integral role in their jointly published
research.
原文链接在此，是2010年的第二个案子。
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B2%20-
%20Aliens%20with%20Extraordinary%20Ability/Decisions_Issued_in_2010/Jan0
42010_01B2203.pdf
读了好几个，发现了一个有用的案子：
如果有同学因为IO说自己的引用不是第一作者文章，可以使用下面的判例。
In support of the preceding experts' statements, the petitioner
submitted documentation showing
hundreds of independent cites to his published findings. In addressing
this evidence, the director's
decision only considered cites to articles for which the petitioner was
identified as "first author."
The director did not consider the citation history for the numerous
other articles coauthored by the
petitioner
...
As modern scientific research endeavors routinely involve collaborative
efforts, we
find no statutory, regulatory, precedential, or evidentiary basis to
conclude that USCIS should not
assign weight to collaborative scientific research such as the
petitioner's. It could be argued that the
director was simply seeking stronger evidence of the petitioner's
prominent role in his research
studies. However, statements from the petitioner's first-author
collaborators submitted on appeal
confirm that he played an integral role in their jointly published
research.
原文链接在此，是2010年的第二个案子。
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B2%20-
%20Aliens%20with%20Extraordinary%20Ability/Decisions_Issued_in_2010/Jan0
42010_01B2203.pdf
