EB1A 140 PP 得到RFE：IO意见如下，请各位版友帮着分析如何回复# Immigration - 落地生根
l*1
1 楼
EB1A 140 PP得到RFE：请各位版友帮着分析如何回复：
等到最后一天得到RFE，IO是435。首先先讲讲pp的感觉：觉得现在pp的人太多，所以PP未必
是件好事，因为IO好像并没有仔细看PL，在最后一天网上的状态是RFE，没收到任何
email通知，过了一周多才得到mail的通知，通知里面说的我稀里糊涂的，不知道到底是过了那几条：
我claim三条：publication contribution，review。Background (29 journals-12
first author, 1 book chapter,8 patent-5 first inventor, conference 10-5
first author，citation: 160,一作：70, review: 44)
有以下几点不明白：
首先关于review：
The petitioner has provided evidence that he has been asked to review more
than 20 papers by over 6 journals. Evidence also showed that he reviewed
more than 15 papers for over 5 journals. While invitations to judge the work
of others and statements listing papers reviewed do not meet this criteria,
evidence that the beneficiary did review papers for various journals
including XXXX journal, XXXX Journal and XXX journal, meets the plain
language of this criterion.
这段是什么意思，到底是我过了还是没过这条？是他没有承认我claim 的数目吗？我需
要怎样response？
关于contribution：
IO把我和推荐人比，推荐人2000年起一个文章就70个引用，还说推荐人的文章比我多，
因此我的数量是limited：IO具体说法如下：
The 2010 article in “xxxxx” shows 6 citations. A similar article by XXX (
我的一个推荐人) in 2000 has over 70 citations. 然后说我第一作者的另外两篇文
章只有1次和3 次引用.A limited number of papers and cites does not support
contributions of major significance. For example, the average number of
papers for the five authors of the recommendation letters listed below is
122 with one author at 230 and one at 30.
This criterion has not been met because the significance of the beneficiary's work has not been objectively demonstrated. The cite listing and number of journal
paper is limited. The beneficiary’s work has not been implemented in the
field or documented in major media.
关于publication
The plain language of this criterion has been met. Although limited in
number, the petitioner has provided evidence that he is first-author on 12
of 29 published journal papers. He is the first-named on 5 of 10 conference
papers and one book chapter. All were published in professional trade
publications or presented at professional conferences.
最后总结部分：
Additionally, meeting the minimum regulatory criteria outlined above, alone
may not establish eligibility for the E11 immigrant classification. For
instance, a less than extensive list of published papers may meet the plain
language of above, should also articulate how the evidence establishes that
the beneficiary possesses the required high level of expertise for the E11
immigrant classification.
请各位帮着分析分析，我是过了几条，该怎么回复
PL里基本都有了，summary，citation图，top10 university比较，小油灯，报道，审
稿人意见，独立推荐信4封，特殊引用，同年比较，邀请投稿以及其它等等。所以response的话感觉不知道是否还要再说一遍。
等到最后一天得到RFE，IO是435。首先先讲讲pp的感觉：觉得现在pp的人太多，所以PP未必
是件好事，因为IO好像并没有仔细看PL，在最后一天网上的状态是RFE，没收到任何
email通知，过了一周多才得到mail的通知，通知里面说的我稀里糊涂的，不知道到底是过了那几条：
我claim三条：publication contribution，review。Background (29 journals-12
first author, 1 book chapter,8 patent-5 first inventor, conference 10-5
first author，citation: 160,一作：70, review: 44)
有以下几点不明白：
首先关于review：
The petitioner has provided evidence that he has been asked to review more
than 20 papers by over 6 journals. Evidence also showed that he reviewed
more than 15 papers for over 5 journals. While invitations to judge the work
of others and statements listing papers reviewed do not meet this criteria,
evidence that the beneficiary did review papers for various journals
including XXXX journal, XXXX Journal and XXX journal, meets the plain
language of this criterion.
这段是什么意思，到底是我过了还是没过这条？是他没有承认我claim 的数目吗？我需
要怎样response？
关于contribution：
IO把我和推荐人比，推荐人2000年起一个文章就70个引用，还说推荐人的文章比我多，
因此我的数量是limited：IO具体说法如下：
The 2010 article in “xxxxx” shows 6 citations. A similar article by XXX (
我的一个推荐人) in 2000 has over 70 citations. 然后说我第一作者的另外两篇文
章只有1次和3 次引用.A limited number of papers and cites does not support
contributions of major significance. For example, the average number of
papers for the five authors of the recommendation letters listed below is
122 with one author at 230 and one at 30.
This criterion has not been met because the significance of the beneficiary's work has not been objectively demonstrated. The cite listing and number of journal
paper is limited. The beneficiary’s work has not been implemented in the
field or documented in major media.
关于publication
The plain language of this criterion has been met. Although limited in
number, the petitioner has provided evidence that he is first-author on 12
of 29 published journal papers. He is the first-named on 5 of 10 conference
papers and one book chapter. All were published in professional trade
publications or presented at professional conferences.
最后总结部分：
Additionally, meeting the minimum regulatory criteria outlined above, alone
may not establish eligibility for the E11 immigrant classification. For
instance, a less than extensive list of published papers may meet the plain
language of above, should also articulate how the evidence establishes that
the beneficiary possesses the required high level of expertise for the E11
immigrant classification.
请各位帮着分析分析，我是过了几条，该怎么回复
PL里基本都有了，summary，citation图，top10 university比较，小油灯，报道，审
稿人意见，独立推荐信4封，特殊引用，同年比较，邀请投稿以及其它等等。所以response的话感觉不知道是否还要再说一遍。
