EB1A I140 被RFE，TSC, 请各位高手给点建议，谢谢# Immigration - 落地生根
a*1
1 楼
分子生物学方向偏肿瘤方向，23篇英文文章，12篇一作，有IF20+和10+一作文章，加上
11篇会议摘要。总引用624次，独立引用439. 推荐信5篇（1封现在老板非独立， 4封独
立，没有特别牛的）。审稿38次，有IF10+的审稿3篇。
先投的EBIA I140两周后pp，TEXAS， OI 0382。
14后收到RFE：承认审稿和authorship，但是需要补充original and major
significance in the field
Evidence of the beneficiary’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic,
athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the
field.
The petitioner has porvided several letters and his googe-scholar citation
index. The citation index showes 624 citations of ten co-anthored published
paper.
然后OI抄写了我的推荐信的摘抄的内容。
This criterion has not been met because the evvidence submitted does not
demonstrate that the beneficiary's contributions are considered to be of
major sgnificance in the field of endeavor. The various letters describe the
benficiary's teams's contributions to the field and state that the
beneficiary is among the top in his field. However, none of the letters
describes how the beneficiary's own contributions have affected his field.
The petitioner has not provided evidence of the beneficiary's citation
record, independent of self-citations by the various authors. He has
submitted no comparable evidence of the citations for the benficiary's field
, to demonstrate the significance of the beneficiary's independent citations
for his field.
1. 前三句话就是说推荐人的推荐信没有着重写我的个人成就，准备再要求三个推荐信。
2. 第四，五句话绝对是他没有细看我的材料，我从WEB OF SCIENCE上下载的438个独立
引用记录，这次着重提一下。并且着重提20个左右的关键独立引用。
请各位帮忙看看提提建议，谢谢。
11篇会议摘要。总引用624次，独立引用439. 推荐信5篇（1封现在老板非独立， 4封独
立，没有特别牛的）。审稿38次，有IF10+的审稿3篇。
先投的EBIA I140两周后pp，TEXAS， OI 0382。
14后收到RFE：承认审稿和authorship，但是需要补充original and major
significance in the field
Evidence of the beneficiary’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic,
athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the
field.
The petitioner has porvided several letters and his googe-scholar citation
index. The citation index showes 624 citations of ten co-anthored published
paper.
然后OI抄写了我的推荐信的摘抄的内容。
This criterion has not been met because the evvidence submitted does not
demonstrate that the beneficiary's contributions are considered to be of
major sgnificance in the field of endeavor. The various letters describe the
benficiary's teams's contributions to the field and state that the
beneficiary is among the top in his field. However, none of the letters
describes how the beneficiary's own contributions have affected his field.
The petitioner has not provided evidence of the beneficiary's citation
record, independent of self-citations by the various authors. He has
submitted no comparable evidence of the citations for the benficiary's field
, to demonstrate the significance of the beneficiary's independent citations
for his field.
1. 前三句话就是说推荐人的推荐信没有着重写我的个人成就，准备再要求三个推荐信。
2. 第四，五句话绝对是他没有细看我的材料，我从WEB OF SCIENCE上下载的438个独立
引用记录，这次着重提一下。并且着重提20个左右的关键独立引用。
请各位帮忙看看提提建议，谢谢。
