YouTube TV怎么能连在电视上看？# PDA - 掌中宝
r*l
1 楼
等了四个月，等来了NSC的NOID。很着急，不知道怎么办。请大家给些建议，帮着分析
一下。不剩感激。
本人属于弱CASE, CS PhD, 工作两年，4篇first author paper, 5篇co-author papers
。审稿60多，独立引用30~40，所有引用60多。做了十几个会议的 program committee
member。
我自己觉得推荐信还好：2 个IEEE FELLOW，几个Professor。
NSC承认了两项：authorship, judgment work。但是认为
The petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the following criteria：
“Evidence of the alien’s original scientific or scholarly research
contributions to the academic field”。
说提供的推荐信，“although the letters describe the beneficiary’s research
and make note of researchers who have cited the beneficiary’s work, they
fail to provide specific descriptions of the impact the beneficiary’s finds
have made on the field.”
The service acknowledges opinions presented in letters written expressly for
this proceeding, but these do not overcome the lack of documentary evidence
that the beneficiary’s work has made an impact in the field, or that the
beneficiary is considered outstanding in the field. Assertions about the
value of the beneficiary’s work do not establish or imply international
recognition or that the alien has made original contributions to the field.
Final Merits Analysis:
While these letters indicate that the beneficiary has developed novel
approaches, they do not establish that this work has garnered international
recognition as outstanding. There is no indication of the widespread
adoption by the field of these approaches, or that adaption of these
approaches by others has occurred at the international level. (我的推荐信里
有一个教授写了推荐信，说他有工作基于我的论文，而且他的一个学生的master
thesis就是我的工作的延伸。虽然大多数推荐信都不是直接引用的论文的作者，但是以
专家的身份例证我的工作被引用。)
Regarding the alien’s authorship of scholarly books or articles, the record
shows that the beneficiary has written several journal articles. While the
beneficiary has been moderately cited, a review of the citations themselves
reveals that the citations primarily reference his work as one of several
studies in the area. Please note that the very act of publishing one’s
research does not constitute a scholarly contribution of major significance.
Authorship and publication is a normal part of a researcher’s duties, and
there is no evidence of record that the beneficiary’s publications are
indicative of international recognition.
The petitioner has submitted evidence that the beneficiary has served as a
reviewer for several journals and conferences in the field. However, it has
not been shown that this level of participation in the peer-review process
has garnered international recognition for the beneficiary, especially when
compared to service as an editor for a scientific journal or as a judge for
recognized awards or memberships in the field.
As discussed, USCIS has evaluated the evidence and determined that the
evidence does not establish that the beneficiary is an outstanding professor
or researcher.
最好说的是工作证明:
Please submit evidence that a qualifying offer of employment exists.
一下。不剩感激。
本人属于弱CASE, CS PhD, 工作两年，4篇first author paper, 5篇co-author papers
。审稿60多，独立引用30~40，所有引用60多。做了十几个会议的 program committee
member。
我自己觉得推荐信还好：2 个IEEE FELLOW，几个Professor。
NSC承认了两项：authorship, judgment work。但是认为
The petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the following criteria：
“Evidence of the alien’s original scientific or scholarly research
contributions to the academic field”。
说提供的推荐信，“although the letters describe the beneficiary’s research
and make note of researchers who have cited the beneficiary’s work, they
fail to provide specific descriptions of the impact the beneficiary’s finds
have made on the field.”
The service acknowledges opinions presented in letters written expressly for
this proceeding, but these do not overcome the lack of documentary evidence
that the beneficiary’s work has made an impact in the field, or that the
beneficiary is considered outstanding in the field. Assertions about the
value of the beneficiary’s work do not establish or imply international
recognition or that the alien has made original contributions to the field.
Final Merits Analysis:
While these letters indicate that the beneficiary has developed novel
approaches, they do not establish that this work has garnered international
recognition as outstanding. There is no indication of the widespread
adoption by the field of these approaches, or that adaption of these
approaches by others has occurred at the international level. (我的推荐信里
有一个教授写了推荐信，说他有工作基于我的论文，而且他的一个学生的master
thesis就是我的工作的延伸。虽然大多数推荐信都不是直接引用的论文的作者，但是以
专家的身份例证我的工作被引用。)
Regarding the alien’s authorship of scholarly books or articles, the record
shows that the beneficiary has written several journal articles. While the
beneficiary has been moderately cited, a review of the citations themselves
reveals that the citations primarily reference his work as one of several
studies in the area. Please note that the very act of publishing one’s
research does not constitute a scholarly contribution of major significance.
Authorship and publication is a normal part of a researcher’s duties, and
there is no evidence of record that the beneficiary’s publications are
indicative of international recognition.
The petitioner has submitted evidence that the beneficiary has served as a
reviewer for several journals and conferences in the field. However, it has
not been shown that this level of participation in the peer-review process
has garnered international recognition for the beneficiary, especially when
compared to service as an editor for a scientific journal or as a judge for
recognized awards or memberships in the field.
As discussed, USCIS has evaluated the evidence and determined that the
evidence does not establish that the beneficiary is an outstanding professor
or researcher.
最好说的是工作证明:
Please submit evidence that a qualifying offer of employment exists.
