NOID了，都是PP惹得祸！大家给点建议吧！
EB1A PP,
Timeline: 10-3-2011, received
10-11-2011, NOID
网上到今天还是Acceptance, 给了我33天.
Background: PhD in Chemistry
10 articles (7 English, 3 Chinese, 4 一作, 5 二作 (其中大部分为导师一作)), 1
book chapter (一作), 5 proceedings, 8 presentations
Citation: 104 total, (about 80 independent) (including early articles in
China, about 70 citations).
Review 25 times for 8 journals
Media report: once
Recommendation letters: 5 from US and Switzerland (3 independent)
Claimed: Authorship, Judge, and Contribution
PL 17pages, 参考Shhyong的模板写的, 没和top 10的faculty比较, 因为没法比.
IO 承认了Judge, Authorship, Media report, 但是不sufficient
不承认award, membership and contribution
没有电子版,只好手打了. 下面是IO的信的相关内容:
......
Published Material about the Alien:
The petitioner has provided a printout of a webpage from XX regarding data
on chemistry as described by researchers at XXX. Having an article published
in a major trade publication alone, regardless of the caliber, should
satisfy the regulatory criteria in part one. However, for the analysis in
part two, the extent of the publication should include primarily be about
the alien and the alien’s work rather than the efforts of a group. The
publication should also be of such significance that it is apparent that the
article are referring to a researcher who is far above the vast majority of
his peers and has established himself as one of that small percentage who
have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor and enjoying sustained
national and international acclaim.
(我没有claim,但是报道里提到了XXX (我的名字) and colleagues, XX University 两
次. 不知道为什么IO拿出来说, 并且说成是group的成就)
Expert Judge/ Reviewer:
… However, for the analysis in part two, the alien’s participation should
be evaluated to determine whether it was indicative of the alien being one
of the small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of
endeavor and enjoying sustained national and international acclaim.
Scholarly Articles:
… However, for the analysis in part two, the alien’s publications should
be evaluated to determine whether they were indicative of the alien being
one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of
endeavor and enjoying sustained national and international acclaim.
…
Original contribution:
… You have submitted evidence of several articles written which have been
moderately cited. No evidence has been submitted establishing how your
research has changed your field as a whole. Also, no evidence been submitted
to establish that other researchers in your field have abandoned their
research in lieu of adopting your findings. No evidence has been presented
to indicate that other universities are using your research as teaching
tools or changed their procedures as a result of your findings.
说我的推荐信speak highly about me and my work. 但是光是推荐信不够. 必须要有
硬证据.
(PL的Contribution这一段里我提及别人对我的文章大段引用(多次), 并且praise了我
的工作. 我发文章的杂志是领域内top 1的, 引用我文章的杂志也是领域内的top (JACS
)杂志. Media report和几个奖都拿来支持contribution了. 怀疑IO没仔细看或者故意
忽略? )
下面是我的准备工作:
1. 我现在要了两封editor的信, 但其中一封只是说了”it should be noted that
only the most qualified international scholars and scientists in the field
of XXX ar invited to review the submitted papers to …”, 不知道行不行.
2. 被邀请写了篇review, 已经online first了, 提交的时候submit了邀请信(里面没提
邀请标准什么的), 最近和editor要了封verification letter.
3. 和引用我文章的人发信要推荐信, 有个欧洲的人同意了, 正准备中. 如果谁有这类
推荐信模板可以借鉴下,麻烦提供下, 非常感谢!
另外有Business Wire和 PR inside 报道了我写了book chapter的那本书, 章节作者里
有我的名字, 不知道算不算媒体报道. ACS的Noteworthy Chemistry上提了有我的一篇
二作文章,不知道提这个有没有用. 另外交的时候油灯图抽风, 准备补个油灯图.
Case 比较弱, 我预计的结果是RFE, 没想到NOID了, 大家提点建议吧!
对了，IO是1056, director(是不是PP被director审的可能性比较大？)
