eb1b nsc 追加pp NOID 0362 deny# Immigration - 落地生根
w*e
1 楼
质疑contributions to your field。
When USCIS reviews your case to determine if you qualify for the EB-1
Outstanding Researcher classification, there are two steps in the analysis.
First, USCIS looks at whether the evidence sufficiently demonstrates that
you have met at least two of six regulatory criteria defined in the
immigration laws. If that first step is satisfied, USCIS then moves to the
second step of the analysis, which is called the "final merits analysis".
For this second step, USCIS looks at all the evidence as a whole to
determine if it sufficiently demonstrates that you are "recognized
internationally as outstanding" in your field of expertise.
In your case, USCIS has determined that step one of the analysis has been
satisfied - i.e., that the evidence sufficiently demonstrates that you have
met at least two of the regulatory criteria. In your case, we submitted
evidence for the following three criteria:
You have made original scholarly or scientific research contributions to
your field;
You have authored scholarly publications in scholarly journals with
international circulation in your field; and
You have served as a judge of the work of others in your field through your
peer review service.
Of these three criteria for which we submitted evidence, USCIS has
determined that (2) and (3) are satisfied (i.e., authorship and peer review)
, but that (1) is not satisfied (i.e, original research contributions to
your field). This "original contributions" criterion has two components.
First, it requires us to show that your research work was "original",
meaning that it was novel and new in some way, rather than replicating the
work of others. Second, it requires us to show that your original research
is considered a "contribution" to your field of expertise, meaning that it
has had a significant impact on the field as a whole. The NOID appears to be
questioning only the second part - i.e., whether your original research is
considered a "contribution" to your field based on its influence/
significance within the field as a whole. There are various ways to
demonstrate the impact of an individual's work on the field. For example,
this is often accomplished through expert reference letters that discuss the
work, and give specific details about how the work has been used by other
researchers or implemented in industry applications by various companies.
Citations to your published work are also a good indicator of impact.
USCIS has determined that although we have gotten past step one, step two of
the analysis has NOT been satisfied (i.e., the "final merits analysis" that
I explained above). This requires us to convince USCIS that all of the
evidence submitted for your case, considered as a whole, shows that you have
been recognized internationally as "outstanding" in your field (
specifically, the field of computer science, specializing in cloud computing
security).
The NOID identifies the following areas where USCIS believes the evidence
falls short of demonstrating that you have received international
recognition as outstanding in your field:
1. The NOID states that your participation in the peer review process does
not exceed that of other researchers or reflect international recognition,
which is more commonly associated with serving on the editorial board of a
prestigious journal or as a program committee chair or general chair of a
scientific conference.
2. The NOID states that evidence that you have published your work, even in
high-impact journals and conferences, is not an indication of your influence
and recognition in the field; instead, it says that frequent independent
citations to your work would be a more objective and reliable measurement of
your influence and recognition, and that the limited evidence of citations
that we submitted (18 examples of articles citing your work) is insufficient.
3. The NOID states that your patent filing shows you have made valuable
contributions to ****, but that it does not show that your work has been
recognized or utilized by others in the field outside of ****.
背景：计算机安全
7篇一作（1篇book chapter）
引用比较低 34
1个pending的专利（居然质疑专利只在本公司用，没有证据证明别人也在用。。。汗）
律师策略：多找写引用的文章（之前律师只要提供15篇，给了18篇）， 最新的税表（
不知道为啥要这个。。。）
When USCIS reviews your case to determine if you qualify for the EB-1
Outstanding Researcher classification, there are two steps in the analysis.
First, USCIS looks at whether the evidence sufficiently demonstrates that
you have met at least two of six regulatory criteria defined in the
immigration laws. If that first step is satisfied, USCIS then moves to the
second step of the analysis, which is called the "final merits analysis".
For this second step, USCIS looks at all the evidence as a whole to
determine if it sufficiently demonstrates that you are "recognized
internationally as outstanding" in your field of expertise.
In your case, USCIS has determined that step one of the analysis has been
satisfied - i.e., that the evidence sufficiently demonstrates that you have
met at least two of the regulatory criteria. In your case, we submitted
evidence for the following three criteria:
You have made original scholarly or scientific research contributions to
your field;
You have authored scholarly publications in scholarly journals with
international circulation in your field; and
You have served as a judge of the work of others in your field through your
peer review service.
Of these three criteria for which we submitted evidence, USCIS has
determined that (2) and (3) are satisfied (i.e., authorship and peer review)
, but that (1) is not satisfied (i.e, original research contributions to
your field). This "original contributions" criterion has two components.
First, it requires us to show that your research work was "original",
meaning that it was novel and new in some way, rather than replicating the
work of others. Second, it requires us to show that your original research
is considered a "contribution" to your field of expertise, meaning that it
has had a significant impact on the field as a whole. The NOID appears to be
questioning only the second part - i.e., whether your original research is
considered a "contribution" to your field based on its influence/
significance within the field as a whole. There are various ways to
demonstrate the impact of an individual's work on the field. For example,
this is often accomplished through expert reference letters that discuss the
work, and give specific details about how the work has been used by other
researchers or implemented in industry applications by various companies.
Citations to your published work are also a good indicator of impact.
USCIS has determined that although we have gotten past step one, step two of
the analysis has NOT been satisfied (i.e., the "final merits analysis" that
I explained above). This requires us to convince USCIS that all of the
evidence submitted for your case, considered as a whole, shows that you have
been recognized internationally as "outstanding" in your field (
specifically, the field of computer science, specializing in cloud computing
security).
The NOID identifies the following areas where USCIS believes the evidence
falls short of demonstrating that you have received international
recognition as outstanding in your field:
1. The NOID states that your participation in the peer review process does
not exceed that of other researchers or reflect international recognition,
which is more commonly associated with serving on the editorial board of a
prestigious journal or as a program committee chair or general chair of a
scientific conference.
2. The NOID states that evidence that you have published your work, even in
high-impact journals and conferences, is not an indication of your influence
and recognition in the field; instead, it says that frequent independent
citations to your work would be a more objective and reliable measurement of
your influence and recognition, and that the limited evidence of citations
that we submitted (18 examples of articles citing your work) is insufficient.
3. The NOID states that your patent filing shows you have made valuable
contributions to ****, but that it does not show that your work has been
recognized or utilized by others in the field outside of ****.
背景：计算机安全
7篇一作（1篇book chapter）
引用比较低 34
1个pending的专利（居然质疑专利只在本公司用，没有证据证明别人也在用。。。汗）
律师策略：多找写引用的文章（之前律师只要提供15篇，给了18篇）， 最新的税表（
不知道为啥要这个。。。）
