TSC，收到RFE。contribution和authorship没过：
Evidence of the beneficiary's original scientific. scholarly. artistic.
athletic. or business-related contributions ofmajor significance in the
field.
The petitioner has provided:
? Numerous expert testimonies from others in the beneficiary's field of
expertise .
? Numerous articles that the petitioner claims references that others in
the field are implementing the findings of the beneficiary.
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. The petitioner provided numerous
testimonial letters as evidence of major significant contributions in the
field of endeavor. Even though the testimonial letters show that the
beneficiary has been influential to his field, additional evidence is
required to determine if the beneficiary's contributions are original and of
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
contribution 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 ofmajor 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 evidence may include but is not limited to:
? o Contracts with companies using the beneficiary's products;
? o Licensed technology being used by others;
? o 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.
这个是不是说推荐信不够具体？请指教。有什么可以加强的？已提交6封推荐信（5个独
立）。
Evidence ofthe beneficiary's authorship ofscholarIv articles in the field,
in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
The petitioner has provided evidence such as:
? A photocopy of the beneficiary's Curriculum Vitae.
? Photocopies of the first pages of English and Chinese research articles
by the beneficiary.
? Evidence of presentations and abstracts.
? Photocopy of a citations list.
This criterion has not been met because the evidence does not show that the
articles were published in professional publications, trade publications, or
other major media. Additional evidence is required to show the articles
were published in a professional, trade or other major media publication. To
assist in determining that the publications qualify as professional or
trade publications or other major media, the petitioner may submit:
• Documentary evidence to establish that the publications in which the
articles appear are professional publications, trade publications, or other
major media.
o Such evidence could include circulation information. If circulation
information is submitted, it should be specific to the media format in which
it was published. That is, if the article was published online, the
evidence must relate to the website. If it was published in print, the
evidence must relate to the printed publication.
所有文章已经把首页、杂志介绍、JCR排名都提供了。什么算circulation information
？journal的网页介绍和publisher已经介绍了呀。
