DIY EB1A 2月中旬寄出的申请，等到了9月中旬， 等来了RFE, IO 是EX0153 有人跟我
是同一个IO的么？
承认authorship和review，不认contribution，感觉IO需要推荐信提具体的贡献，给出
硬证据。原文在最下面。
背景：
化学和药理方面
15 paper , 3 first author paper
citation 58
review 16
reference: 老板一封 （美国），剩下的是独立推荐人，美国 1个，英国一个，日本一
个，加拿大一个。还有一个journal的editor，用来说review的。
有篇文章有报道，但没我名字，只有老板的名字，原始材料提供了，不知道IO 看了没
有怎么想。我再想能不能让老板写信说我是主要的contributor，虽然没提名字
有公司用我的实验方法，但只是email，不知道能不能用来当证据，实际上原始材料我
提供了，IO不知道看了没有
找引用我paper的人，让他具体写我的paper是怎么影响他的实验design的，不知道能不
能找到人愿意这么写
还要重新再论证我是top small percentage 么？当时用了2007年的faculty 的那个列
表，只比较了发文章的数量，没放引用率，因为太低，那现在还要再放一遍么？说了受
邀请做一个会议的chair，另外被邀请人有一个俄国的院士，不知道IO看了没有。但我
实际没有去，有用么? 还有什么其他的办法说是top percent的？
在等回复的期间，我的文章涨到了24，引用涨到了107，能把这个数字和原始材料分开
，证明我continue to contribute 这个领域么？
这里有个很大的问题，我现在不在学校了，在公司，而且不做研究了，这个怎么处理？
还是不用提了，不吭声，只说明根据我提交的材料，我有sustained international
reputation?
非常非常感谢大家的意见！！！
The petitioner has provided letters from employers, colleagues and experts
in the filed. However, 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. To assist in
determining whether the beneficiary's contributions satisfy this criterion,
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 of major significance.
-Evidence that beneficiary's major significant contributions 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:
-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.
最后summary 里还放了模板的两步法的内容
