不认可 media reports and contribution. 总体感觉是IO根本没看PL.
一篇2nd author有USA Today, BBC, CNN, US NEWS, Washington Post, Seattle time,
etc 的报道和其他几十个网络报道,但都是只提到1st author的名字,(A Full
Professor, MD, PhD.).和1个EditoralCommentary.
一篇1st author的有2,3个EditoralCommentary.
一篇2nd author有1个EditoralCommentary.
一篇Nnd author有1个NewsLetter.
夏花MM, 媒体报道如果是2nd author,被RFE了 怎么来对付.因为没有REVIEW,只能上媒
体报道了,怎么才呢满足"published material about the beneficiary", IO的"
Additional notes"又提到"The published material should be about the
beneficiary and his work in the field, not just about the beneficiary’s
employer or other organizations the beneficiary is associated with."
只靠EditoralCommentary能行吗?
*******
The petitioner has provided evidence of published materials in major media
about the beneficiary’s work as one member of a research team. However,
this criterion has not been met because the evidence does not establish that
these materials were about the beneficiary. If applicable, please submit
evidence of published material about the beneficiary in professional or
major trade publications or other major media. To assist in determining that
the published materials satisfy this criterion, the petitioner may submit:
Documentary evidence including:
The title, date, and author of the published materials;
The circulation(online and/or in print); and,
The intended audience of the publication.
Note: the evidence submitted should be specific to the media format in which
it was published. If the material was published online, the evidence should
relate to the website. If it was published in print, the evidence should
relate to the printed publication.
Additional notes:
Published material should be dated prior to the date of submission of this
Form I-140
The published material should be about the beneficiary and his work in the
field, not just about the beneficiary’s employer or other organizations the
beneficiary is associated with.
Marketing materials created for the purpose of selling the beneficiary’s
products or promoting the beneficiary’s services are not generally
considered to be published material about the beneficiary.
Unevaluated listings in a subject matter index or footnote, or reference to
the beneficiary’s work without evaluation are insufficient.
********
Conbribution部分,自我感觉是没好好准备RL,4封是两年前NIW用的.新的就2封.
The petitioner has provided opinion letters by experts in the beneficiary’s
field and evidence establishing moderate citation of the beneficiary’s
work. However, 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. To assist in
determining whether the beneficiary’s contributions satisfy this criterion,
the petitioner may submit:
*Objective documentary evidence of the significance of the beneficiary’s
contribution to the field.
* Documentary evidence that the people throughout the field currently
consider the beneficiary’s work important.
*Additional testimony and/or support letters from experts which discuss the
beneficiary’s contributions of major significance (see note below)
*Evidence that the beneficiary’s major significant contributions has
provoked widespread public commentary in the field or has been widely cited.
* Evidence of the beneficiary’s work being implemented by others. Possible
evidence may include but is not limited to:
Contracts with companies using the beneficiary’s products
Licensed technology being used by others
Patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant to the field
Note: letters and testimonies, if submitted, must provide as much detail as
possible about the beneficiary’s contribution and must explain, in detail,
how the contribution was “original” (not merely replicating the work of
others) and of “major” significance. General statements regarding the
importance of the potentials of the endeavors which are not supported by
documentary evidence are insufficient.
****************
谢谢指教.
