EB1A DIY PP, denied after RFE - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>Immigration - 落地生根

EB1A DIY PP, denied after RFE

EB1A DIY PP, denied after RFE# Immigration - 落地生根

l*a2011-06-20 07:06

1 楼

RFE by TSC XM 277,
原帖：http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/Immigration/31955591.html
Denial was issued by a different IO, TSC XM1219，
who didn't care about my response to the RFE at all，
but denied for the reason of lack of evidence/establishment that were
actually presented in the original petition and was already accepted by the
initial IO.
所以给正准备RFE的童鞋提个醒，
response to RFE的时候最好把initial petition的东西（即便是已经认可的）也都附
上并陈述一遍。
以免碰到不同的IO review，
只看你的RFE response不看initial petition，
然后就说你没这没那，就给拒了。
现在悲剧了，
不知道要应该 appeal or simply file a new petition now.

I*t2011-06-20 07:06

2 楼

pat pat，祝好运！

l*a2011-06-20 07:06

3 楼

Btw, 没有online update or email notification before I received the denial
letter in mail.

the

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

: RFE by TSC XM 277,
: 原帖：http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/Immigration/31955591.html
: Denial was issued by a different IO, TSC XM1219，
: who didn't care about my response to the RFE at all，
: but denied for the reason of lack of evidence/establishment that were
: actually presented in the original petition and was already accepted by the
: initial IO.
: 所以给正准备RFE的童鞋提个醒，
: response to RFE的时候最好把initial petition的东西（即便是已经认可的）也都附
: 上并陈述一遍。

v*b2011-06-20 07:06

4 楼

Comfort...
I think u need to appeal
There is no reason the IO just denied all the original decision
Bless

p*12011-06-20 07:06

5 楼

what is your background?then we can give you suggestions for appeal or not.

l*e2011-06-20 07:06

6 楼

if that's the case, try to combine your RFE and original petition letter
together to file new case ba...

l*a2011-06-20 07:06

7 楼

背景在这：
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/Immigration/31955591.html
Any suggestion or advice is welcome and appreciated.
谢了～

【在 p*****1 的大作中提到】

: what is your background?then we can give you suggestions for appeal or not.

e*r2011-06-20 07:06

8 楼

很显然，再进攻一次，肯定成啦。不弱的case！

b*r2011-06-20 07:06

9 楼

this is not background info. Background info is pretty simple. Just list how
many papers, citations, reviews, items you have claimed.

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

: 背景在这：
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/Immigration/31955591.html
: Any suggestion or advice is welcome and appreciated.
: 谢了～

e*s2011-06-20 07:06

10 楼

老夫去年也是被这个家伙给Deny了，不过一开始就是他。
应该是杀手级的人物了

the

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

l*a2011-06-20 07:06

11 楼

Sorry, 背景在原帖里我的回复中，
总结如下：
PhD in Biomedical Science, top 10 US university.
Publications: 5 (2 first authored)，journal IF 8~15, plus 1 invited book
chapter.
Citations: 100＋（independent 90+)
Awards: 1 NIH grant (the 2nd IO denied it as an "award" but saying "it's
just an 'encouragement' to researchers"), and 1 travel award by an
international research society (which to argue my "international recognition
").
Media report: our research team and the discovery were featured by the PBS
TV serie and other news media.
Claimed: Authorship (met), contribution (met), award (did not meet), media
report (didn't claim but met).
The first IO questioned that the major contribution and the media reports
about my studies are all "team" work, and so asked for additional evidence
to establish my leading/primary role in those studies.
Accordingly, in the response to RFE,
I listed the postion of my authorship in each of my papers and specified the
role I played in each of the studies, (all the statements were accompanied
by a letter from the senior PI of each of the paper) .
In the response to RFE, I also emphasized that I myself was featured in the
PBS TV program and other news as the lead author (out of 20+ team members)
of the work, which demonstrated my leading and primary role. And again, my
boss wrote a letter to verify that.
Nevertheless, the 2nd IO totally ignored the RFE the first IO issued or my
response to that RFE,
but said: "the weight of the evidence of record is diminished by a lack of
other evidence showing that the articles were particularly influential..."
可其实这部分，我在original petition里花了大量篇幅陈述，
基本上是按照RFE的template里一条一条都写到了，
所以the first IO也没挑出什么毛病，就过了。
因此Response to RFE没有再重写一遍，
只是针对1st IO的要求回复的。
可显然the 2nd IO根本没看initial petition里这部分的内容，
竟然说“It is not demonstrated that your work have attracted a level of
interest in the field commensurate with national or international acclaim"，
然后就给拒了，太悲剧了～

how

【在 b*********r 的大作中提到】

: this is not background info. Background info is pretty simple. Just list how
: many papers, citations, reviews, items you have claimed.

l*a2011-06-20 07:06

12 楼

被杀手拒了以后，
你是appeal了呢还是重新file了个新petition?
any suggestion?

【在 e**s 的大作中提到】

: 老夫去年也是被这个家伙给Deny了，不过一开始就是他。
: 应该是杀手级的人物了
:
: the

b*r2011-06-20 07:06

13 楼

Try to get reviews now. When >15, resubmit and claim contribution,
authorship, and judge of others' work. I don't think you can meet media
report and awards requirements. That's my recommendations. I could be wrong,
though:)

recognition

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

: Sorry, 背景在原帖里我的回复中，
: 总结如下：
: PhD in Biomedical Science, top 10 US university.
: Publications: 5 (2 first authored)，journal IF 8~15, plus 1 invited book
: chapter.
: Citations: 100＋（independent 90+)
: Awards: 1 NIH grant (the 2nd IO denied it as an "award" but saying "it's
: just an 'encouragement' to researchers"), and 1 travel award by an
: international research society (which to argue my "international recognition
: ").

l*t2011-06-20 07:06

14 楼

file a new one. bless

发信人: lilla (香水paper), 信区: Immigration
标题: EB1A DIY PP, denied after RFE
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon Jun 20 18:03:50 2011, 美东)
RFE by TSC XM 277,
原帖：http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/Immigration/31955591.html
Denial was issued by a different IO, TSC XM1219，
who didn't care about my response to the RFE at all，
but denied for the reason of lack of evidence/establishment that were
actually presented in the original petition and was already accepted by the
initial IO.
所以给正准备RFE的童鞋提个醒，
response to RFE的时候最好把initial petition的东西（即便是已经认可的）也都附
上并陈述一遍。
以免碰到不同的IO review，
只看你的RFE response不看initial petition，
然后就说你没这没那，就给拒了。
现在悲剧了，
不知道要应该 appeal or simply file a new petition now.

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

: 被杀手拒了以后，
: 你是appeal了呢还是重新file了个新petition?
: any suggestion?

i*u2011-06-20 07:06

15 楼

Comfort.
We in fact have a connection in our cases. My RFE response was denied by XM
277, while the IO who sent RFE was another one...

l*a2011-06-20 07:06

16 楼

I don't understand how come XM 277 had time to review your RFE response that
was issued by another IO, at the meanwhile s/he didn't have time to review
my response to RFE that s/he issued?
This is like you addressed all the questions a reviewer raised to your
manuscript, but all of sudden, your response was passed to another reviewer
who didn't even bother to read the manuscript but concluded that there was
no main body of scientific discovery solely based on your response letter
and rejected your manuscript.

XM

【在 i*****u 的大作中提到】

: Comfort.
: We in fact have a connection in our cases. My RFE response was denied by XM
: 277, while the IO who sent RFE was another one...

g*62011-06-20 07:06

17 楼

是呢，不错的背景，再review一些吧，一定会过的，别灰心，加油！

wrong,

【在 b*********r 的大作中提到】

: Try to get reviews now. When >15, resubmit and claim contribution,
: authorship, and judge of others' work. I don't think you can meet media
: report and awards requirements. That's my recommendations. I could be wrong,
: though:)
:
: recognition

i*u2011-06-20 07:06

18 楼

Mine was denied by 277 on June 08, 2011. Maybe he/she went vacation after
that, and has not come back as of today (June 20, 2011)...
We will probably never know the reason why 277 handled my RFE response, or did not handle your RFE response. Only thing we know is that the luck is not on
our side :-(

that
review

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

: I don't understand how come XM 277 had time to review your RFE response that
: was issued by another IO, at the meanwhile s/he didn't have time to review
: my response to RFE that s/he issued?
: This is like you addressed all the questions a reviewer raised to your
: manuscript, but all of sudden, your response was passed to another reviewer
: who didn't even bother to read the manuscript but concluded that there was
: no main body of scientific discovery solely based on your response letter
: and rejected your manuscript.
:
: XM

i*32011-06-20 07:06

19 楼

休息两个月，再递，应该没问题的。

p*12011-06-20 07:06

20 楼

My personal suggestions: I think it is hard to appeal which also takes
longer time than re-application. I feel that you primarily failed in the
totality such as that that without enough 1st author papers and the
explanation letter from your advisor would not be solid evidence to change
the fact and help much. Maybe the better way is to take a little rest and
then re-apply, and you may find more evidence such as the influence of your
that two papers, as well as you can get more evidences such as new
publication and new review etc. during the new preparation procedure.

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

: 背景在这：
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/Immigration/31955591.html
: Any suggestion or advice is welcome and appreciated.
: 谢了～

e*s2011-06-20 07:06

21 楼

1）我的背景不强，我都没看到petition letter,从RFE的信中看来律师准备的很差，因
此首先背景差，其次准备的不好，被拒也是理所当然的。
2）过了几个月，又换了个律师重新办的，现在交上去几个月了也没有消息，且等着吧
。这次以为换了个好律师，结果发现还是不行，于是自己花费了很多很多的时间和精力
。也明白第一次为什么被拒了，自己就是给律师发过去点资料而已。
3）这一次虽然尽最大努力了，但是还是感觉不行，所以不敢pp，听天由命吧，如果NIW
排期能快点的话，这次再不行，就等排期了。
4）直接再file一次吧，祝你好运！

【在 l***a 的大作中提到】

: 被杀手拒了以后，
: 你是appeal了呢还是重新file了个新petition?
: any suggestion?