140 NSC RFE求助# Immigration - 落地生根
i*2
1 楼
DIY仔细准备了材料，感觉可以直接过，没有想到收到了RFE，不知怎么回复，麻烦有经
验的给提些建议，非常感谢！
背景：
美国Top20 PhD, Top10 Postdoc. Claim老三样：文章、贡献和审稿
文章：11篇。5 1st author；5 篇领域内最好杂志（IF~10）；一篇为中文杂志。 引用
190+ (ISI), 250+ (Google Scholar).
审稿：24，（IF 从25到1不等，9个杂志）
推荐信：5封独立加1封PhD导师（美国、英国、意大利、加拿大和台湾）。
1封主编审稿证明信
1封公司合作者支持信
参考版上的经验，深挖了自己的贡献。做了油灯图，根据关键词索引了自己的文章，列
出了Small Percentage，也总结了引用并应用自己文章的文献。
感觉所有证据都已经用上了，手头上当时多准备了三封独立推荐信预防RFE（以色列、
爱尔兰、美国；美国那封来自工作界；2封编辑证明信）。
Timeline
06/11/2013 Efile
06/17/2013 RD
06/25/2013 PP received and started
07/01/2013 PP stopped
07/08/2013 RFE received from NSC0299
现在有几个问题
1. 在RFE中提到了Translation，不知道这一段是固有的模板，还是要让我提供翻译件
？因
为我有一篇中文文章，不过当时已经提供了英文摘要，不确定RFE中为什么会提到翻译。
2. RFE是不是承认文章和审稿？另外Totality是不是IO也承认？
3. 关于贡献，IO提到了我的5封独立推荐人的名字及单位，但认为这些推荐信不足以证明
Oriniality和Majory Significance，请教回复策略？
4. 回复RFE，需要重新再提交原来提交的证据吗（上次提交了五百多页的材料 ），还
是只提交这次的新证据？
以下是RFE全文：
I-140 E11 Alien of Extraordinary Ability
Reference is made to this Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker,
seeking E11 immigrant classification as an individual of extraordinary
ability for XXXX.
The beneficiary intends to work as research scientist in the field of
chemistry.
The E11 immigrant classification applies to individuals with extraordinary
ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics. The
individual must demonstrate that they have sustained national or
international acclaim and that their achievements have been recognized in
the field of expertise, indicating that they are one of the small percentage
who has risen to the very top of their field of endeavor. The individual
must plan to continue to work in their area of extraordinary ability and
must substantially benefit prospectively the United States.
To process the petition and determine if the beneficiary is eligible,
additional information is required. This request provides suggested evidence
that you could submit to satisfy each requested items. Or, you may choose
to submit none of them, and instead submit other evidence to satisfy the
request. You may also explain why or how the evidence in the record already
establishes eligibility. Please note, however, that you are responsible for
providing evidence that best shows the beneficiary meets all requirements.
The evidence must show that the beneficiary was eligible for the requested
benefit when you filed the Form I-140.
Translations regarding documents in a Foreign Language.
All non-English language documents must have an English translation for the
pertinent parts of the document that help to establish eligibility. If you
would like USCIS to consider evidence that is written in a foreign language,
you must submit English language translation for the parts of the documents
that help to establish eligibility for requested benefit. The translator
must certify that:
The translations are accurate and complete, and
The translator is competent to translate for the foreign language into
English.
A two-part analysis is used to determine whether the beneficiary is an
individual of extraordinary ability:
First, we determine whether the petitioner has submitted evidence to show
that the beneficiary:
Has received a one-time achievement (a major internationally recognized
award); or,
Qualifies under at least three of the ten criteria required for this
classification.
If the petitioner establishes that the beneficiary has received a one time
achievement (a major internationally recognized award), or meets at least
three of the other criteria, we then determine whether the petitioner has
submitted evidence demonstrating the the beneficiary:
Has sustained national or international acclaim.
In determining whether the beneficiary has enjoyed “sustained” national or
international acclaim, such acclaim must be maintained. A beneficiary may
have achieved extraordinary ability in the pat but then failed to maintain a
comparable level of acclaim thereafter; and
Has achievements the have been recognized in the field of expertise,
indicating the beneficiary is one of that small percentage who has risen to
the very top of the field of endeavor.
The petitioner has provided documentation under the following regulatory
areas:
Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel,
as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of
specialization for which classification is sought.
Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic,
or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in
professional or major trade publications or other major media.
A discussion follows addressing the areas of insufficiency and what could be
submitted to overcome them.
…..
Evidence of the beneficiary’s participation, either individually or on a
panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of
specialization for which classification is sought.
Based on the evidence currently in the record, it appears that this
criterion has been met.
…...
Evidence of the beneficiary’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic,
atheletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the
field.
The petitioner has provided a citation history, documentation concerning the
entities publishing the beneficiary’s scholarly works, and letters from
the following persons:
a) Dr. XXXX
b) Dr. XXXX
c) Dr. XXXX
d) Dr. XXXX
e) Dr. XXXX
This criterion has not been met because the evidence submitted does not show
that beneficiary’s contributions are considered to be of major
significance in the field of endeavor. While the authors of these letters do
describe a talented productive researcher and scientist, they do not
provide adequate detail concerning the major significance of the beneficiary
’s work. In addition, the beneficiary’s citation history, in and of itself
, is not dispositive of the requirement of a contribution of original major
significance. To assist in determining whether the beneficiary’s
contributions are original and of major significance in the field, the
petitioner may submit:
Objective documentary evidence of the significance of the beneficiary’s
contributions to the field.
Documentary evidence that people throughout the field currently consider the
beneficiary’s work important.
Testimony and/or support letters from experts which discuss the beneficiary
’s contributions of major significance.
Evidence that the beneficiary’s major significant contribution(s) has
provoked widespread public commentary in the field or has been widely cited.
Evidence of the beneficiary’s work being implemented by others. Possible
eveidence 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 how they were of “major” significance. General statements
regarding the importance of the endeavors which are not supported by
documentary evidence are insufficient.
Evidence of the beneficiary’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field
, in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Based on the evidence currently in the record, it appears that this
criterion has been met.
…....
As discussed above, the beneficiary has not garnered a one-time achievement
award or met at least three of the ten criteria. As such, USCIS is affording
the petitioner the opportunity to submit additional evidence to establish
that beneficiary meets the regulatory criteria. The response to this request
should address the insufficiencies articulated by USCIS in this request.
Additional, meeting the minimum regulatory criteria outlined above, alone
will not establish eligibility for the E11 immigrant classification. Any
evidence submitted in response to this request, should also articulate how
the evidence establishes that the beneficiary possesses the required high
level of expertise for the E11 immigrant classification.
This is the petitioner’s opportunity to articulate further details or
provide additional evidence in regards to how the evidence submitted in the
initial filing or in response to this Request for Evidence establishes that
the beneficiary meets the requirements regards high level of expertise for
the immigrant classification.
Establishing eligibility for the high level of expertise required for the
E11 immigrant classification is based on the beneficiary possessing:
Sustained national or international acclaim.
In determining whether the beneficiary has enjoyed “sustained” national or
international acclaim such acclaim must be maintained. A beneficiary may
have achieved extraordinary ability in the past but then failed to maintain
a comparable level of acclaim thereafter, and,
Achievements that have been recognized in the field of expertise, indicating
that beneficiary is one of that small percentage who has risen to the very
top of the field of endeavor.
In conclusion, when ultimately making a final decision regarding eligibility
, USCIS will first evaluate the evidence submitted by the petitioner to
determine which regulatory criteria the beneficiary meets in part one of the
analysis. If the petitioner establishes that the beneficiary has received a
one-time achievements (a major internationally recognized award) or meet at
least three of the antecedent evidentiary prongs, then USCIS will evaluate
all of the evidence in the record to make a final merits determination of
the whether or not the petitioner, by a preponderance of the evidence, has
demonstrated the beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim
and that the beneficiary’s achievements have been recognized in the field
of expertise, indicating that the beneficiary is one of the small percentage
who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor.
The is the petitioner’s opportunity to meet their legal burden of proof to
establish eligibility in all respects. Whenever any person makes an
application for an immigration benefit, they shall bear the burden of proof
to establish eligibility for the benefit sought. Therefore, the petitioner
must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, in other words, that it is
more likely than not, that the beneficiary is fully qualified for the
benefit sought. Accordingly, the decision will based on the initial evidence
submitted upon filing and all additional evidence submitted in response to
this request.
验的给提些建议，非常感谢！
背景：
美国Top20 PhD, Top10 Postdoc. Claim老三样：文章、贡献和审稿
文章：11篇。5 1st author；5 篇领域内最好杂志（IF~10）；一篇为中文杂志。 引用
190+ (ISI), 250+ (Google Scholar).
审稿：24，（IF 从25到1不等，9个杂志）
推荐信：5封独立加1封PhD导师（美国、英国、意大利、加拿大和台湾）。
1封主编审稿证明信
1封公司合作者支持信
参考版上的经验，深挖了自己的贡献。做了油灯图，根据关键词索引了自己的文章，列
出了Small Percentage，也总结了引用并应用自己文章的文献。
感觉所有证据都已经用上了，手头上当时多准备了三封独立推荐信预防RFE（以色列、
爱尔兰、美国；美国那封来自工作界；2封编辑证明信）。
Timeline
06/11/2013 Efile
06/17/2013 RD
06/25/2013 PP received and started
07/01/2013 PP stopped
07/08/2013 RFE received from NSC0299
现在有几个问题
1. 在RFE中提到了Translation，不知道这一段是固有的模板，还是要让我提供翻译件
？因
为我有一篇中文文章，不过当时已经提供了英文摘要，不确定RFE中为什么会提到翻译。
2. RFE是不是承认文章和审稿？另外Totality是不是IO也承认？
3. 关于贡献，IO提到了我的5封独立推荐人的名字及单位，但认为这些推荐信不足以证明
Oriniality和Majory Significance，请教回复策略？
4. 回复RFE，需要重新再提交原来提交的证据吗（上次提交了五百多页的材料 ），还
是只提交这次的新证据？
以下是RFE全文：
I-140 E11 Alien of Extraordinary Ability
Reference is made to this Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker,
seeking E11 immigrant classification as an individual of extraordinary
ability for XXXX.
The beneficiary intends to work as research scientist in the field of
chemistry.
The E11 immigrant classification applies to individuals with extraordinary
ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics. The
individual must demonstrate that they have sustained national or
international acclaim and that their achievements have been recognized in
the field of expertise, indicating that they are one of the small percentage
who has risen to the very top of their field of endeavor. The individual
must plan to continue to work in their area of extraordinary ability and
must substantially benefit prospectively the United States.
To process the petition and determine if the beneficiary is eligible,
additional information is required. This request provides suggested evidence
that you could submit to satisfy each requested items. Or, you may choose
to submit none of them, and instead submit other evidence to satisfy the
request. You may also explain why or how the evidence in the record already
establishes eligibility. Please note, however, that you are responsible for
providing evidence that best shows the beneficiary meets all requirements.
The evidence must show that the beneficiary was eligible for the requested
benefit when you filed the Form I-140.
Translations regarding documents in a Foreign Language.
All non-English language documents must have an English translation for the
pertinent parts of the document that help to establish eligibility. If you
would like USCIS to consider evidence that is written in a foreign language,
you must submit English language translation for the parts of the documents
that help to establish eligibility for requested benefit. The translator
must certify that:
The translations are accurate and complete, and
The translator is competent to translate for the foreign language into
English.
A two-part analysis is used to determine whether the beneficiary is an
individual of extraordinary ability:
First, we determine whether the petitioner has submitted evidence to show
that the beneficiary:
Has received a one-time achievement (a major internationally recognized
award); or,
Qualifies under at least three of the ten criteria required for this
classification.
If the petitioner establishes that the beneficiary has received a one time
achievement (a major internationally recognized award), or meets at least
three of the other criteria, we then determine whether the petitioner has
submitted evidence demonstrating the the beneficiary:
Has sustained national or international acclaim.
In determining whether the beneficiary has enjoyed “sustained” national or
international acclaim, such acclaim must be maintained. A beneficiary may
have achieved extraordinary ability in the pat but then failed to maintain a
comparable level of acclaim thereafter; and
Has achievements the have been recognized in the field of expertise,
indicating the beneficiary is one of that small percentage who has risen to
the very top of the field of endeavor.
The petitioner has provided documentation under the following regulatory
areas:
Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel,
as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of
specialization for which classification is sought.
Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic,
or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in
professional or major trade publications or other major media.
A discussion follows addressing the areas of insufficiency and what could be
submitted to overcome them.
…..
Evidence of the beneficiary’s participation, either individually or on a
panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of
specialization for which classification is sought.
Based on the evidence currently in the record, it appears that this
criterion has been met.
…...
Evidence of the beneficiary’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic,
atheletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the
field.
The petitioner has provided a citation history, documentation concerning the
entities publishing the beneficiary’s scholarly works, and letters from
the following persons:
a) Dr. XXXX
b) Dr. XXXX
c) Dr. XXXX
d) Dr. XXXX
e) Dr. XXXX
This criterion has not been met because the evidence submitted does not show
that beneficiary’s contributions are considered to be of major
significance in the field of endeavor. While the authors of these letters do
describe a talented productive researcher and scientist, they do not
provide adequate detail concerning the major significance of the beneficiary
’s work. In addition, the beneficiary’s citation history, in and of itself
, is not dispositive of the requirement of a contribution of original major
significance. To assist in determining whether the beneficiary’s
contributions are original and of major significance in the field, the
petitioner may submit:
Objective documentary evidence of the significance of the beneficiary’s
contributions to the field.
Documentary evidence that people throughout the field currently consider the
beneficiary’s work important.
Testimony and/or support letters from experts which discuss the beneficiary
’s contributions of major significance.
Evidence that the beneficiary’s major significant contribution(s) has
provoked widespread public commentary in the field or has been widely cited.
Evidence of the beneficiary’s work being implemented by others. Possible
eveidence 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 how they were of “major” significance. General statements
regarding the importance of the endeavors which are not supported by
documentary evidence are insufficient.
Evidence of the beneficiary’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field
, in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Based on the evidence currently in the record, it appears that this
criterion has been met.
…....
As discussed above, the beneficiary has not garnered a one-time achievement
award or met at least three of the ten criteria. As such, USCIS is affording
the petitioner the opportunity to submit additional evidence to establish
that beneficiary meets the regulatory criteria. The response to this request
should address the insufficiencies articulated by USCIS in this request.
Additional, meeting the minimum regulatory criteria outlined above, alone
will not establish eligibility for the E11 immigrant classification. Any
evidence submitted in response to this request, should also articulate how
the evidence establishes that the beneficiary possesses the required high
level of expertise for the E11 immigrant classification.
This is the petitioner’s opportunity to articulate further details or
provide additional evidence in regards to how the evidence submitted in the
initial filing or in response to this Request for Evidence establishes that
the beneficiary meets the requirements regards high level of expertise for
the immigrant classification.
Establishing eligibility for the high level of expertise required for the
E11 immigrant classification is based on the beneficiary possessing:
Sustained national or international acclaim.
In determining whether the beneficiary has enjoyed “sustained” national or
international acclaim such acclaim must be maintained. A beneficiary may
have achieved extraordinary ability in the past but then failed to maintain
a comparable level of acclaim thereafter, and,
Achievements that have been recognized in the field of expertise, indicating
that beneficiary is one of that small percentage who has risen to the very
top of the field of endeavor.
In conclusion, when ultimately making a final decision regarding eligibility
, USCIS will first evaluate the evidence submitted by the petitioner to
determine which regulatory criteria the beneficiary meets in part one of the
analysis. If the petitioner establishes that the beneficiary has received a
one-time achievements (a major internationally recognized award) or meet at
least three of the antecedent evidentiary prongs, then USCIS will evaluate
all of the evidence in the record to make a final merits determination of
the whether or not the petitioner, by a preponderance of the evidence, has
demonstrated the beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim
and that the beneficiary’s achievements have been recognized in the field
of expertise, indicating that the beneficiary is one of the small percentage
who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor.
The is the petitioner’s opportunity to meet their legal burden of proof to
establish eligibility in all respects. Whenever any person makes an
application for an immigration benefit, they shall bear the burden of proof
to establish eligibility for the benefit sought. Therefore, the petitioner
must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, in other words, that it is
more likely than not, that the beneficiary is fully qualified for the
benefit sought. Accordingly, the decision will based on the initial evidence
submitted upon filing and all additional evidence submitted in response to
this request.
