Update: 今天收到正式的Denial letter了，仍然是否认Contribution。
关键部分如下：
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. In the RFE , USCIS had suggested the
following objective documentary evidence of the significance of the
beneficiary's contribution to the field:
--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
evidence may include but is not limited to:
(a) Contracts with companies using the beneficiary 's products ;
(b) Licensed technology being used by others ;
(c) Patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant to the
field.
With initial evidence, the petitioner's claim too this criterion was based
mainly on two things: letters of recommendation and citations. In the RFE,
USCIS had explained why this was not ample, and gave the above suggestions.
However, in response, the petitioner has only submitted more of the same.
There still is not the independent and objective evidence to support what
letter writers have stated. Lastly, you do claim that your work has provoked
public commentary. However, you have only given us examples of citations.
This is not USCIS' intent, when it asks for public commentary. Again, the
petitioner is one of numerous people being cited - it is not "about" the
petitioner's work , and therefore not considered widespread public
commentary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
按照这个说法，引用里面的评论不算public commentary，那到底什么才算？单独对我
的paper发一篇评论文章？
另外，我在RFE里面列出了我的工作被其它作者应用的证据，0444直接视而不见。
很无语，不知道是我人品太差还是过于相信律师，只能等段时间再说了。
