家里有小孩子的# PDA - 掌中宝
L*r
1 楼
DIY PP approved on the day 7.
#################################################
Please send me a Baozi if you find helpful. It will be very encouraging to
people like me sharing the experience.
I love Baozi.
##################################################
I have been helped and blessed by many people from this board. I also saved
around $4500 lawyer fee by visiting here often. Plus it's great fun and more
rewarding to DIY. It's time to pay back so I'd like to share some
experiences during the whole application process.
Outline of preparation of PL and recommendation letters
(Note: in the first two or three weeks, I worked on this almost in full time
. So if you can only spend less time everyday, you should expect longer
timeline)
Week 1: Internet search, database search, ask journal editors for support
letters
Week 2: outline of PL, focus on contributions, write journal support letters
and send out
Week 3: write recommendation letters and ask potential referees
Week4: write recommendation letters and send out recommendation letters for
signature
Week 5: write PL and push referees to send letters back if they didn't do it
Week 6: put all the supporting documents together in the order of their
citations on the PL. Final check and go to USPS/UPS/Fedex
Timeline
Document posted: 10/13
Document received: 10/17
Acceptance: 10/18
Approved: 10/24
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Background:
I won't define myself as a 'weak case', although it seems popular to do so
in this board. However, I won't say mine is a strong case, as you will see.
So this is an average case.
Computational Biology/bioinformatics
16 papers, 9 as first/corresponding authors. I have one good paper (IF>30)
and basically 90% of my contribution part will reply on this. Three papers
IF>10 but they are all new with zero citations so far. The rest of papers IF
<10.
Citations: 101 if I use google scholar and ISI combined. Otherwise <90
Review: 25 for 11 journals, including all the top 3 journals in my field.
Media report: one paper was reported in Faculty 1000 by five faculties.
Faculty 1000 editor selected it as 'board impact'. Top paper in that month.
Top 25 in Sciencedirect for a year. Highlighted By Cell and Nature reviews.
Reported by a number of Internet medias internationally.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Preparation of application
The international office in my institute said my case was too weak to try an
EB1B last November when I thought about to apply. By that time, I had 9
reviews and around 70 citations. I fought with them until this April, they
allowed to file an application for me. By that time, I had 24 reviews. After
that, I was too busy on my work and just left it aside. This August, I
thought I should start working on this and sent several emails to the
international office. It took them more than two weeks to reply me which is
very frustrating. In August and September, three people I know well got
approved (EB1A) with not-strong background. I decided to go for EB1A by
myself instead of wasting time with those hopeless people in the
international office.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Lawyer or not
Zac Liu said I had a 'reasonable chance'. Jerry Zhang said I was good for an
EB1A if the documents were well prepared. So I decided to do myself as they
were all positive. The main reasons are (1) to save money and (2) it takes
longer time to let them handle my case than I do it by myself. Plus, I have
to write most of stuffs anyway.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PL and recommendation letters
I started writing around September 6. I started with an outline of PL. I was
not sure whether I should claim 'media report' or not. Now I think it doesn
't matter I claim 'media report' or put them into contribution because I can
meet at least three anyway. If I did this last year at the time I didn't
have many reviews, I would claim 'media report'.
So I decided to claim 'authorship', 'judgement' and 'contribution'.
The main work for 'authorship' is to collect citation reports. I did this
when my brain didn't work. It seems OK to put your accepted paper into
authorship as far as you have proof from the editor.
The main work for 'judgement' is to obtain support letters from editors. It'
s much easier to get editor support letters than recommendation letters
because they are generally happy to do so for their reviewers. However, in
case they wrote letters for you, you have to ask them to put something like
your professional credentials into the letters if you didn't see that. I
received 4 letters in a week, from US, UK, Germany and South Korea,
respectively.
The main works for 'contribution' are (1) to search all the possible reports
about your work, (2) to read all the paper citing you, find out how people
actually use your work. (3) to write recommendation letters. I outlined all
the points I want to highlighted. I read AAO decisions for the last three
years http://www.uscis.gov/uscis-ext-templating/uscis/jspoverride/errFrameset.jsp and copies all the paragraphs IOs like to see. I put them into my letters. The MOST important thing is that I emphasized how other researchers used my work as a basis of their work or to their knowledge, how my works actually impacted the field. I only sent letters to the people I didn't know directly. I sent 3 letters to people who discussed my work in their research or review papers and none of them were willing to write letters to me. I sent 6 letters to people who collaborate with my previous advisor with the statements in the front that " i was a former student of Dr. XXX and he kindly suggested that i may look for help from you". I received 5 positive responses. While I was waiting for their replies, I started writing drafts of recommendation letters. The letters are all less than one and half pages. The basic format is "introduction -- referee's background (emphasize in the same fields and Independence to you) -- From their prospective, what's your research about -- To their knowledge, how does your research impact the field (you have to write some examples here. It would be great if they describe how your research open a new line to their research) -- Conclusion.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Other thoughts
+++++++++++++
Thought I. You don't have to do EB1B if you think you have a chance for an
EB1A. The advantage of EB1A is that it is controlled by yourself. Either for
Eb1A or 1B, you have to write most of things. The backup plan is if you
fail with EB1A, you than give the documents to schools/companies and go for
EB1B.
++++++++++++
Thought II (from my previous thread): We have come across those questions
many times, including myself.
Question(1): should I claim media report if there are some reports about my
work, such as Faculty 1000, preview, research highlights, internet medias,
detailed discussion about my work in review papers...
Question (2): Should I claim 'judge others' work' if I have only reviewed 5
or 6 papers?
Typical answer to question (1): No, this is about your work, not you. This
argument is backed by Zac Liu.
Typical answer to question (2): No. You should have at least >10, or 15 or
20 etc.
My point is: it depends. In some situations, the answer is yes for either
question.
However, the prerequisite is you HAVE TO meet authorship and contribution
first.
If you only have reports about your work and don't have a good number of
reviews, you should claim a 'media report' and file an application, because
you don't have other options! It may be a bit risky but is not a
mission impossible. Maybe at the time you are preparing for and waiting for
your I140, you should look for some papers to review. If you only have a few
number of reviews and don't have other options to claim, you should claim a
'judge other' work' and file an application. It may be a bit risky but is
not a mission impossible. Maybe at the time you are preparing for and
waiting for your I140, you should look for some reviews.
The point is that you don't do it, you get nothing. You do it, you put $520
at the risk vs you probably get passed.
I believe IOs judge one's application based on her/his overall quality of
the research.
For the people have both reports about your work and a good number of
reviews, you are free to claim them or put them into contribution, as far as
you have met three.
So just do it, otherwise you get NOTHING.
+++++++++++++
Thanks for reading. If you reach this part, you should send a Baozi to me
for my hard works.
#################################################
Please send me a Baozi if you find helpful. It will be very encouraging to
people like me sharing the experience.
I love Baozi.
##################################################
I have been helped and blessed by many people from this board. I also saved
around $4500 lawyer fee by visiting here often. Plus it's great fun and more
rewarding to DIY. It's time to pay back so I'd like to share some
experiences during the whole application process.
Outline of preparation of PL and recommendation letters
(Note: in the first two or three weeks, I worked on this almost in full time
. So if you can only spend less time everyday, you should expect longer
timeline)
Week 1: Internet search, database search, ask journal editors for support
letters
Week 2: outline of PL, focus on contributions, write journal support letters
and send out
Week 3: write recommendation letters and ask potential referees
Week4: write recommendation letters and send out recommendation letters for
signature
Week 5: write PL and push referees to send letters back if they didn't do it
Week 6: put all the supporting documents together in the order of their
citations on the PL. Final check and go to USPS/UPS/Fedex
Timeline
Document posted: 10/13
Document received: 10/17
Acceptance: 10/18
Approved: 10/24
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Background:
I won't define myself as a 'weak case', although it seems popular to do so
in this board. However, I won't say mine is a strong case, as you will see.
So this is an average case.
Computational Biology/bioinformatics
16 papers, 9 as first/corresponding authors. I have one good paper (IF>30)
and basically 90% of my contribution part will reply on this. Three papers
IF>10 but they are all new with zero citations so far. The rest of papers IF
<10.
Citations: 101 if I use google scholar and ISI combined. Otherwise <90
Review: 25 for 11 journals, including all the top 3 journals in my field.
Media report: one paper was reported in Faculty 1000 by five faculties.
Faculty 1000 editor selected it as 'board impact'. Top paper in that month.
Top 25 in Sciencedirect for a year. Highlighted By Cell and Nature reviews.
Reported by a number of Internet medias internationally.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Preparation of application
The international office in my institute said my case was too weak to try an
EB1B last November when I thought about to apply. By that time, I had 9
reviews and around 70 citations. I fought with them until this April, they
allowed to file an application for me. By that time, I had 24 reviews. After
that, I was too busy on my work and just left it aside. This August, I
thought I should start working on this and sent several emails to the
international office. It took them more than two weeks to reply me which is
very frustrating. In August and September, three people I know well got
approved (EB1A) with not-strong background. I decided to go for EB1A by
myself instead of wasting time with those hopeless people in the
international office.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Lawyer or not
Zac Liu said I had a 'reasonable chance'. Jerry Zhang said I was good for an
EB1A if the documents were well prepared. So I decided to do myself as they
were all positive. The main reasons are (1) to save money and (2) it takes
longer time to let them handle my case than I do it by myself. Plus, I have
to write most of stuffs anyway.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PL and recommendation letters
I started writing around September 6. I started with an outline of PL. I was
not sure whether I should claim 'media report' or not. Now I think it doesn
't matter I claim 'media report' or put them into contribution because I can
meet at least three anyway. If I did this last year at the time I didn't
have many reviews, I would claim 'media report'.
So I decided to claim 'authorship', 'judgement' and 'contribution'.
The main work for 'authorship' is to collect citation reports. I did this
when my brain didn't work. It seems OK to put your accepted paper into
authorship as far as you have proof from the editor.
The main work for 'judgement' is to obtain support letters from editors. It'
s much easier to get editor support letters than recommendation letters
because they are generally happy to do so for their reviewers. However, in
case they wrote letters for you, you have to ask them to put something like
your professional credentials into the letters if you didn't see that. I
received 4 letters in a week, from US, UK, Germany and South Korea,
respectively.
The main works for 'contribution' are (1) to search all the possible reports
about your work, (2) to read all the paper citing you, find out how people
actually use your work. (3) to write recommendation letters. I outlined all
the points I want to highlighted. I read AAO decisions for the last three
years http://www.uscis.gov/uscis-ext-templating/uscis/jspoverride/errFrameset.jsp and copies all the paragraphs IOs like to see. I put them into my letters. The MOST important thing is that I emphasized how other researchers used my work as a basis of their work or to their knowledge, how my works actually impacted the field. I only sent letters to the people I didn't know directly. I sent 3 letters to people who discussed my work in their research or review papers and none of them were willing to write letters to me. I sent 6 letters to people who collaborate with my previous advisor with the statements in the front that " i was a former student of Dr. XXX and he kindly suggested that i may look for help from you". I received 5 positive responses. While I was waiting for their replies, I started writing drafts of recommendation letters. The letters are all less than one and half pages. The basic format is "introduction -- referee's background (emphasize in the same fields and Independence to you) -- From their prospective, what's your research about -- To their knowledge, how does your research impact the field (you have to write some examples here. It would be great if they describe how your research open a new line to their research) -- Conclusion.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Other thoughts
+++++++++++++
Thought I. You don't have to do EB1B if you think you have a chance for an
EB1A. The advantage of EB1A is that it is controlled by yourself. Either for
Eb1A or 1B, you have to write most of things. The backup plan is if you
fail with EB1A, you than give the documents to schools/companies and go for
EB1B.
++++++++++++
Thought II (from my previous thread): We have come across those questions
many times, including myself.
Question(1): should I claim media report if there are some reports about my
work, such as Faculty 1000, preview, research highlights, internet medias,
detailed discussion about my work in review papers...
Question (2): Should I claim 'judge others' work' if I have only reviewed 5
or 6 papers?
Typical answer to question (1): No, this is about your work, not you. This
argument is backed by Zac Liu.
Typical answer to question (2): No. You should have at least >10, or 15 or
20 etc.
My point is: it depends. In some situations, the answer is yes for either
question.
However, the prerequisite is you HAVE TO meet authorship and contribution
first.
If you only have reports about your work and don't have a good number of
reviews, you should claim a 'media report' and file an application, because
you don't have other options! It may be a bit risky but is not a
mission impossible. Maybe at the time you are preparing for and waiting for
your I140, you should look for some papers to review. If you only have a few
number of reviews and don't have other options to claim, you should claim a
'judge other' work' and file an application. It may be a bit risky but is
not a mission impossible. Maybe at the time you are preparing for and
waiting for your I140, you should look for some reviews.
The point is that you don't do it, you get nothing. You do it, you put $520
at the risk vs you probably get passed.
I believe IOs judge one's application based on her/his overall quality of
the research.
For the people have both reports about your work and a good number of
reviews, you are free to claim them or put them into contribution, as far as
you have met three.
So just do it, otherwise you get NOTHING.
+++++++++++++
Thanks for reading. If you reach this part, you should send a Baozi to me
for my hard works.
