On the 1st of February, I received the RFE letter from USCIS. On the 27th January there was a hard LUD. I was surprised to have received two page RFE asking more for every point. I submitted I-140 myself. My credentials and what I submitted to USCIS are as follows.
(i). Receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes
1. BEST POSTER AWARD from an Asian Society conference. But my name was in the third place.
2. NEW INVESTIGATOR AWARD for the year 2007 from Alzheimer’s association of United States.
3. POSTDOCTORAL AWARD from International Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, Italy
4. POSTDOCTORAL AWARD from Science and Technology Agency (STA, now JSPS) of government of Japan.
5. PHARMACEUTICAL SAFETY AND RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP, Government of Japan
6. SENIOR RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP from the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), government of India.
(ii). Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly contributions of major significance in the field
1. 240+ citations in original research papers and 14 citations in the books. Please note that I submitted the print outs for citations in the books only, but since the 240+ citations are too many, I only listed them, but did not submit the print outs.
2. An invitation letter to speak about my research in a University
3. Reference letters total 9, 4 of them were independent.
(iii) Evidence of the aliens authorship of scholarly articles in the field
1. Submitted printouts of 28 papers, but only 8 of them were first author papers.
2. Submitted 15 abstracts presented at conferences, but only 6 of them were first authors
(iv). Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same field
1.Submitted only the email letters from Editors of 3 journals for which I reviewed a total of 4 manuscripts.
(v) Published material about the alien in professional major trade publications or other major media
1. My work with collaborators were mentioned in about 250 words in Medical News Today online. I was the second author.
2. Same work was referred in the Health News Blog
3. Same work was referred in Biomedicine. One page print outs from these three sources were submitted
4. One of my research paper was referred by Government agencies such as US
Department of Health and Human Services. Cited the paper at 12 places in a 50 page report.
5. This same paper was also referred by a report from Canadian wild life agency, environmental conservation branch, Ontario region.
6. This same work was referred by Natural Resources defence Council, one of the US’s most effective environmental action group.
7. This same work was also cited in the Medscape news.
(vi). Documentation of the alien’s membership to associations in the field for which classification is sought
1.Submitted paid.membership letters from two societies.
I claimed all 6 categories.
The RFE letter is as follows. The first page is only the usual stuff such as the response should be submitted by 10th March etc. The second page has the actual questions.
(i). Documentation of the aliens receipt of prizes and awards……..
* The record shows a series of poster presentation accolades, fellowships, and grants that were issued to the petitioner. In case of academic accolades, such recognition would not be sought by or accessible to veterans in the field. If further evidence of this criterion is to be submitted, it must include explanations of the reputation of the organization granting the award, the significance of the award, and the criteria used to select the recipient.
(ii). Documentation of the aliens’s membership in associations in the field for which the classification is sought……..
* The record shows the petitioner is a member of the Society for Neuroscience and the International Society to advance Alzheimer’s research and treatment. However, as the record did not include information regarding the membership standards for these societies and subscription, they can not be considered to be sufficient evidence of extraordinary ability. If further evidence of this criterion is to be submitted, it must include information regarding the requirements necessary to meet for membership and demonstrate that it is evidence of extraordinary ability.
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications……
* The record shows citations made by others of the petitioner’s work, but this criterion requires that the evidence of articles about the petitioners work, not articles that reference them to support them to support their own. . If further evidence of this criterion is to be submitted, it must also clearly objectively indicate that the work is significant: an unevaluated listing in a subject matter index or footnote, or a reference to the work without evaluation is insufficient, or a mere reference to his work or inclusion of his publications in bibliographies or footnotes, would also be insufficient for this criterion.
(iv). Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually……..
* The record shows that the petitioner has participated in the peer review process. While this suggests recognition of the petitioner’s knowledge and competence, further objective documentation is needed to show that the petitioner has extraordinary ability. . If further evidence of this criterion is to be submitted, it must include information regarding the criteria and significance for selection as a panelist, reviewer etc:
(v). Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic………
* The service notes the many letters written by colleagues and peers of the petitioner. However, a successful petition is not solely dependent on support letters. Thus further objective documentary evidence showing that the petitioner’s original contributions are are of major significance is needed.
(vi). Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field……..
* The record shows that the petitioner has had a number of articles published and that others have cited them. However, as publication of articles are part of the career path of a research scientist, additional evidence such as further objective documentation of the significance of the published articles and the articles that cite them, is needed to show that the petitioner has sustained national or international acclaim for having extraordinary ability.
After submission of the I-140, I received one R03 grant from NIH , one paper in JBC and acceptance of a provisional application for a patent in a university. Do you guys think I can include these eventhough they were obtained after the petition?. I strongly feel the way I presented was not good. Any input is greatly appreciated, please suggest.
I-140 EB1-EA (NSC)
RD : 03/31/2008
ND : 04/02/2008
LUD : 01/27/2009
RD : 06/25/2008
ND : 06/25/2008
LUD : 06/25/2008;06/29/2008