logicators
Registered Users (C)
They are now processing October 1st as compare to May 10 last month. Anyone between May and October heard anything about their case?
CSC EB1-EA dates jumped 5 months
- Thread starter logicators
- Start date
by the way, my I-485 was touched too
I filed I-485 in connection with the EB1A in May this year. It got a RFE the same time as the I-140 RFE. I think CIS is doing I-140 and I-485 together as they promised, no matter it is concurrently filed or not. (I did not file I-485 with the EB1B case).
I filed I-485 in connection with the EB1A in May this year. It got a RFE the same time as the I-140 RFE. I think CIS is doing I-140 and I-485 together as they promised, no matter it is concurrently filed or not. (I did not file I-485 with the EB1B case).
logicators
Registered Users (C)
That's good.
Mine was filed in September and I still don't see any updates online. Hopefully, they will process it soon.
Mine was filed in September and I still don't see any updates online. Hopefully, they will process it soon.
logicators
Registered Users (C)
James,
Did you hear anything yet? They are processing November now.
logicators
Did you hear anything yet? They are processing November now.
logicators
DelightFish
Registered Users (C)
really?
hi logicators,
are they processing November case? How do you know that? Is there any friends around you got some news? My petition is November. I am crossing my fingers.
Thanks for sharing information,
DelightFish
hi logicators,
are they processing November case? How do you know that? Is there any friends around you got some news? My petition is November. I am crossing my fingers.
Thanks for sharing information,
DelightFish
DelightFish
Registered Users (C)
Yes, they are
Yes, they are processing November case. I also found it on their on-line status.
Thanks
Yes, they are processing November case. I also found it on their on-line status.
Thanks
logicators
Registered Users (C)
Not sure what's going on. They did not touch my September case yet
DelightFish
Registered Users (C)
My case was submitted on November 7th, 2003, which should be exact the date they are processing. But I have not got any news. So you do not have to worry. The date showing on the on-line status maybe not that accurate.
When you get your case approved, please let us know.
Good luck to all of us.
When you get your case approved, please let us know.
Good luck to all of us.
Alien_Simba
Registered Users (C)
I got an RFE
I filed EB1-EA myself last year. My ND is November 17, 2003. I just found out on-line that an RFE was sent out to me on October 14, 2004. I have not seen it yet. I am anxiously waiting for it. I will let you guys know later and might need to consult seasoned GC applicants on this forum.
I filed EB1-EA myself last year. My ND is November 17, 2003. I just found out on-line that an RFE was sent out to me on October 14, 2004. I have not seen it yet. I am anxiously waiting for it. I will let you guys know later and might need to consult seasoned GC applicants on this forum.
Alien_Simba
Registered Users (C)
I got an RFE!!!
Please find out details of my RFE at following link.
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=948552#post948552
Alien_Simba said:I filed EB1-EA myself last year. My ND is November 17, 2003. I just found out on-line that an RFE was sent out to me on October 14, 2004. I have not seen it yet. I am anxiously waiting for it. I will let you guys know later and might need to consult seasoned GC applicants on this forum.
Please find out details of my RFE at following link.
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=948552#post948552
leroythelion
Registered Users (C)
Alien_Simba said:
You are probably better off posting your RFE details here. They don't usually deal with EA issues on the "main" board.
You mentioned that you "strong" letters. Did you have "legal" letters? There is a difference. If the reviewer does not see the evidence explicitely written, he cannot approve your petition.
BTW, I too worked at the NRC in Canada in 1996/1997 (almost surely a different institute). A good place to get a lot of good publications.
Brian
Alien_Simba said:
I think the Adjudicator has made his case very logically. It's likely that your attorney did not present a strong case despite you having the credentials. Take your time by researching forums like these and view and review all of the decisions at the USCIS site to formulate and strategize arguments in your RFE response.
(i) Regarding your award at NRC it is likely that it won't fly with the USCIS as the competition was not open to national/international researchers from other research institutions. It's construed as a "local" award. If you can somehow show that papers for this compettion were submitted from other universities/labs, it might be difficult to satisfy this category. However you can use this award in another category below as shown.
(iii) Regarding citation, this should be addressed in category (vi) below. However, for published material about you, if you can make copies of papers that have analyzed your work in fair depth and highlight the text in that paper and tie it to your paper that they have analyzed, then this may work. Make sure that you add more reference letters and at least one should emphasize this. Also, send in all the information (circulation, etc.) info...you can find this at Worldcat/Firstsearch or SCI. Any press coverage for your work?
(v) Your papers, etc., should be addressed in category (vi). Do you have any patents or patent applications that were filed. Are these being used or licensed anywhere? What about your work at NRC?
(vi) Citations/papers should go in this category. Include copies of papers that cited your work and highlight that these researchers were international. Get info from worldcat/sci on journals etc. The use of "impact factors" from SCI is debatable. Also get some referees to comment on your work. This should be easy category to satisfy upon response. Mention your NRC award.
(viii) critical role--only reference letters form NRC can do this effectively. Since you got an award at NRC, include that award in this category (duplicate info on award from (vi) can work if the info is presented properly) and mention why you got it...breakthrough work that affected NRC. Include lots of background and prestige info on NRC. This category should work for you.
Also organize your response with the strongest categories up front.
I agree with Leroy. Also you may want to start a new thread.
Good luck!
Alien_Simba
Registered Users (C)
Hi Leroy!
It is nice to meet an NRC alumnus here. Sorry, I am a newbie for this on-line forum so I still don't know where is where yet. I will repost my original post here just for archive purpose.
Leroy, can you please tell me what is "Legal Letter"?
It is nice to meet an NRC alumnus here. Sorry, I am a newbie for this on-line forum so I still don't know where is where yet. I will repost my original post here just for archive purpose.
Leroy, can you please tell me what is "Legal Letter"?
Alien_Simba
Registered Users (C)
Received RFE on EB1-EA, please HELP!(Repost)
Dear fellow GC applicants,
I have just received an RFE on my EB1-EA I-140 petition from CIS at CSC after anxiously waiting for 11 months. I did the petition myself. The RFE I got is a tough one. None of my arguments in my petition is standing now. The CIS attached me on all fronts. I am totally stonewalled by CIS. I feel there is an attitude in the words of the RFE. I have typed entire text of the RFE below in exact same font and format used in my RFE. My responses/comments and questions are typed in blue. Please read on. Any comments or advice from my fellow GC applicants are very much appreciated.
My Credentials:
PhD from top university in UK in 1992.
Worked 8 years at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC).
95 publications, 10 as first author.
Over 100 citations on my papers, the citation search was done in 2000.
Was awarded an NRC Award for outstanding achievement at NRC.
5 strong reference letters from PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues.
Refereed a few journal papers.
A few invited talks.
Has been working as engineer/manager at small companies in US since 2000.
Stats:
LC approved in 10/02
EB2 I-140/485 RD 11/02
Denied 7/03 due to petitioner’s inability to pay.
Appeal filed in 8/03 and pending now.
Self-petitioned EB1-EA I-140 RD 11/17/03.
RFE 10/14/04
The RFE from CIS
The petition has been reviewed and has been found to be deficient. Submit evidence that addresses the deficiencies below, or submit additional evidence relating to at least three of the categories shown in bold. In order to satisfy the initial requirements for “Extraordinary Ability”, an applicant needs to satisfy at least three of the categories below. State which categories the applicant is attempting to satisfy, and how they would qualify for the category specified. Also, separate the evidence according to each category sought.
(i) Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser national or international recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
National awards: The significance of the alien’s national awards has not been established. Submit evidence to establish the origination, purpose, significance and scope of each award, as well as the criteria used to nominate and judge the participants and award winners.
The award listed (Industrial Partnership Award) does not appear to be a national award and was given to you and your colleagues.
(My comments: I got an award as a team effort while I was working at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in 1999. The award is called Industrial Partnership Award. It is one of the awards within NRC’s Outstanding Achievement Awards Program. I probably need to do a better job here. I will contact NRC officials to get them write a letter about the award and explain more about it.)
(ii) Documentation of the alien’s membership…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(I have no contest here. I am a member of IEEE, and a membership fee is the only thing needed to be admitted.)
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which classification is sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation;
Published material: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the published material submitted about the alien’s work and how it has set the alien apart from others in the field as one of the small percentage of who have risen to the very top of their field. Indicate the publication’s name; if it has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed. Citation of the petitioner’s work does not establish that the articles in question are “about” the petitioner or his work.
(My comments: I have got over one hundred citations about the papers I published in the years I worked as researcher. One of my papers opened up a new direction and there are many researchers worldwide still working in that direction. That was why I got many hits in citation search. These are actually clearly stated in my strong reference letters from my PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues. How can I prove this point further? One of my papers was about a brilliant quantum-dot device I made. Many physicists conducted ground breaking experiments on it and there were new physical phenomena discovered, and therefore new theory was established because of my device. These again were clearly stated in my reference letters. Does CIS want me to go into technical details as what physics was discovered and how it was discovered? Please help me on this one.)
(iv) Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which classification is sought;
Judge of the work of others: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the work judged by the alien and the criteria used to choose the alien as a judge. Peer reviewing or being a referee is routine in the field. Without evidence that sets the petitioner apart from others in the field, such as evidence that he has reviewed an unusually large number of articles, received independent requests from a substantial number of journals, or served in an editorial position for distinguished journal, the Service cannot conclude that the petitioner meets this criterion.
(My comments: I am kind of weak on this one. Maybe I should plea no contest here.)
(v) Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
Original contributions: Submit evidence to establish how the alien’s work is considered original and how it has made a major contribution of significance to the field of researcher compare to all others in the field.
(My comments: The fact of lacking comments from CIS reviewer in bold form might indicate that I am doing OK in this section. He/she just wants to see more evidence. But I do not know what more I can do here. The originality and significance of my research work have been clearly stated and proved in my reference letters, the number of my publications, the number of citations I have got, the quality of professional journals in which I was able to publish my papers and my NRC award. Don't they already have a list of reputable professional journals on hand for reference so reviewers can easily identify what journal is a good one? What did they do in their professional training? how to stonewall vulnerable GC seakers? My fellow seasoned GC applicants, please help me. I am grateful for any kind of advice or comment.)
(vi) Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media;
Scholarly articles: Provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the alien’s scholarly articles in the field. Additionally, provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the professional or major trade publications or other major media that have published the alien’s scholarly articles. Indicate if the publication has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed.
(My comments: I really do not know how I can tell CIS reviewer that Applied Physics Letters, Physical Review Letters, Photonics Technology Letters and Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology are very important professional journals which are referenced by every researchers/engineers in the fields, and are collected by every technical libraries around the world. The facts that my papers were accepted by these highly selective journals prove my research work is important and significant. Again, my fellow GC applicants, please tell me what more I can do here.)
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien’s work…
Does not relate to the applicant’s field of endeavor.
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organization or establishments that have a distinguished reputation;
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(My comments: I have a lot more to say about this one too. But you might already tired of reading this long posting. Therefore, I rest my case for now. Thank you very much for your patient in reading my miserable story. I would appreciate more if you could give me some insightful advice.)
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commended a high salary…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(x) Evidence of commercial…
Does not relate to the applicant’s
Dear fellow GC applicants,
I have just received an RFE on my EB1-EA I-140 petition from CIS at CSC after anxiously waiting for 11 months. I did the petition myself. The RFE I got is a tough one. None of my arguments in my petition is standing now. The CIS attached me on all fronts. I am totally stonewalled by CIS. I feel there is an attitude in the words of the RFE. I have typed entire text of the RFE below in exact same font and format used in my RFE. My responses/comments and questions are typed in blue. Please read on. Any comments or advice from my fellow GC applicants are very much appreciated.
My Credentials:
PhD from top university in UK in 1992.
Worked 8 years at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC).
95 publications, 10 as first author.
Over 100 citations on my papers, the citation search was done in 2000.
Was awarded an NRC Award for outstanding achievement at NRC.
5 strong reference letters from PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues.
Refereed a few journal papers.
A few invited talks.
Has been working as engineer/manager at small companies in US since 2000.
Stats:
LC approved in 10/02
EB2 I-140/485 RD 11/02
Denied 7/03 due to petitioner’s inability to pay.
Appeal filed in 8/03 and pending now.
Self-petitioned EB1-EA I-140 RD 11/17/03.
RFE 10/14/04
The RFE from CIS
The petition has been reviewed and has been found to be deficient. Submit evidence that addresses the deficiencies below, or submit additional evidence relating to at least three of the categories shown in bold. In order to satisfy the initial requirements for “Extraordinary Ability”, an applicant needs to satisfy at least three of the categories below. State which categories the applicant is attempting to satisfy, and how they would qualify for the category specified. Also, separate the evidence according to each category sought.
(i) Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser national or international recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
National awards: The significance of the alien’s national awards has not been established. Submit evidence to establish the origination, purpose, significance and scope of each award, as well as the criteria used to nominate and judge the participants and award winners.
The award listed (Industrial Partnership Award) does not appear to be a national award and was given to you and your colleagues.
(My comments: I got an award as a team effort while I was working at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in 1999. The award is called Industrial Partnership Award. It is one of the awards within NRC’s Outstanding Achievement Awards Program. I probably need to do a better job here. I will contact NRC officials to get them write a letter about the award and explain more about it.)
(ii) Documentation of the alien’s membership…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(I have no contest here. I am a member of IEEE, and a membership fee is the only thing needed to be admitted.)
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which classification is sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation;
Published material: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the published material submitted about the alien’s work and how it has set the alien apart from others in the field as one of the small percentage of who have risen to the very top of their field. Indicate the publication’s name; if it has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed. Citation of the petitioner’s work does not establish that the articles in question are “about” the petitioner or his work.
(My comments: I have got over one hundred citations about the papers I published in the years I worked as researcher. One of my papers opened up a new direction and there are many researchers worldwide still working in that direction. That was why I got many hits in citation search. These are actually clearly stated in my strong reference letters from my PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues. How can I prove this point further? One of my papers was about a brilliant quantum-dot device I made. Many physicists conducted ground breaking experiments on it and there were new physical phenomena discovered, and therefore new theory was established because of my device. These again were clearly stated in my reference letters. Does CIS want me to go into technical details as what physics was discovered and how it was discovered? Please help me on this one.)
(iv) Evidence of the alien’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which classification is sought;
Judge of the work of others: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the work judged by the alien and the criteria used to choose the alien as a judge. Peer reviewing or being a referee is routine in the field. Without evidence that sets the petitioner apart from others in the field, such as evidence that he has reviewed an unusually large number of articles, received independent requests from a substantial number of journals, or served in an editorial position for distinguished journal, the Service cannot conclude that the petitioner meets this criterion.
(My comments: I am kind of weak on this one. Maybe I should plea no contest here.)
(v) Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
Original contributions: Submit evidence to establish how the alien’s work is considered original and how it has made a major contribution of significance to the field of researcher compare to all others in the field.
(My comments: The fact of lacking comments from CIS reviewer in bold form might indicate that I am doing OK in this section. He/she just wants to see more evidence. But I do not know what more I can do here. The originality and significance of my research work have been clearly stated and proved in my reference letters, the number of my publications, the number of citations I have got, the quality of professional journals in which I was able to publish my papers and my NRC award. Don't they already have a list of reputable professional journals on hand for reference so reviewers can easily identify what journal is a good one? What did they do in their professional training? how to stonewall vulnerable GC seakers? My fellow seasoned GC applicants, please help me. I am grateful for any kind of advice or comment.)
(vi) Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media;
Scholarly articles: Provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the alien’s scholarly articles in the field. Additionally, provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the professional or major trade publications or other major media that have published the alien’s scholarly articles. Indicate if the publication has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed.
(My comments: I really do not know how I can tell CIS reviewer that Applied Physics Letters, Physical Review Letters, Photonics Technology Letters and Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology are very important professional journals which are referenced by every researchers/engineers in the fields, and are collected by every technical libraries around the world. The facts that my papers were accepted by these highly selective journals prove my research work is important and significant. Again, my fellow GC applicants, please tell me what more I can do here.)
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien’s work…
Does not relate to the applicant’s field of endeavor.
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organization or establishments that have a distinguished reputation;
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(My comments: I have a lot more to say about this one too. But you might already tired of reading this long posting. Therefore, I rest my case for now. Thank you very much for your patient in reading my miserable story. I would appreciate more if you could give me some insightful advice.)
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commended a high salary…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(x) Evidence of commercial…
Does not relate to the applicant’s
leroythelion
Registered Users (C)
Alien_Simba said:
A legal letter is one that "meets the legal requirements" of your petition. Each item that your are trying to prove in your petition must be spelled out in the letter. The RFE tells you to separate out all the criteria you are seeking. The letters must do that too.
Brian
Alien_Simba
Registered Users (C)
My EB1-EA is APPROVED!!!
Hi Guys,
I just found out at USCIS webpage that my EB1-EA self-petition was approved today. CIS received my RFE on Jan 10, 2005. A pleasant surprise to me, they approved my case today! Remember, when I received RFE three months ago, I was really depressed and dismayed. I really appreciate all you guys' encouragement and useful advices. I finally pulled myself together and focused on writing a good response to the RFE. Now, I finally got it approved. I have got a lot of help from this forum, especially GSXR1000, Honkman and Leroy. Thank you very much guys and keep up the good work here.
I still have one more question. I have an I-485 still pending due to an employer sponsored EB2 I-140 was denied and appeal is pending. Can I link this I-485 to my current approved and self-petitioned I-140?
Thanks again and good luck to you all.
Stats:
LC approved in 10/02
EB2 I-140/485 RD 11/02
Denied 7/03 due to petitioner’s inability to pay.
Appeal filed in 8/03 and pending now.
Self-petitioned EB1-EA I-140 RD 11/17/03.
RFE 10/14/04
EB1-EA Approved 1/13/05
Hi Guys,
I just found out at USCIS webpage that my EB1-EA self-petition was approved today. CIS received my RFE on Jan 10, 2005. A pleasant surprise to me, they approved my case today! Remember, when I received RFE three months ago, I was really depressed and dismayed. I really appreciate all you guys' encouragement and useful advices. I finally pulled myself together and focused on writing a good response to the RFE. Now, I finally got it approved. I have got a lot of help from this forum, especially GSXR1000, Honkman and Leroy. Thank you very much guys and keep up the good work here.
I still have one more question. I have an I-485 still pending due to an employer sponsored EB2 I-140 was denied and appeal is pending. Can I link this I-485 to my current approved and self-petitioned I-140?
Thanks again and good luck to you all.
Stats:
LC approved in 10/02
EB2 I-140/485 RD 11/02
Denied 7/03 due to petitioner’s inability to pay.
Appeal filed in 8/03 and pending now.
Self-petitioned EB1-EA I-140 RD 11/17/03.
RFE 10/14/04
EB1-EA Approved 1/13/05
Congratulations Alien_Simba
Heartiest Congratulations Alien_Simba!
I first read your detailed posting discussing your RFE and I felt dismayed and depressed too. Looks like you made a teriffic turn around! When you get some free time, it will be great if you can post on this thread how you successfully refuted the RFE. A similarly tough RFE (that too from NSC who is known to be the toughest of them all) is a big worry looming on my head right now, and studying a successful case such as yours will greatly help me and others similarly situated in improving our positions.
Heartiest Congratulations Alien_Simba!
I first read your detailed posting discussing your RFE and I felt dismayed and depressed too. Looks like you made a teriffic turn around! When you get some free time, it will be great if you can post on this thread how you successfully refuted the RFE. A similarly tough RFE (that too from NSC who is known to be the toughest of them all) is a big worry looming on my head right now, and studying a successful case such as yours will greatly help me and others similarly situated in improving our positions.
Alien_Simba
Registered Users (C)
Thanks
I basically did the response according to everyone's suggestions in my postings. I read through quite a few AAO decisions on EA cases on CIS webpage. They helped me a lot in terms of understanding what CIS is looking for when they are reviewing your submission. I think the key is that you should have a good understanding of how this process works, what each criterion requires and what CIS wants to see in your response. I think it is also important that DO NOT make any unreasonable claim in your submission. Use your common sense.
Among 10 criteria for EA, I claimed I can satisfy (v), (vi) and (viii). I think I can easily satisfy (v) and (vi) because of my extensive publications and research experience. I am kind of weak on (viii). In order to respond to my RFE, I did a freash new citation search on 15 of my main publications. Be sure to mark out those citation hits happened after your initial submission. These evidences do not count according CIS rules. I also presented a lot of internet search results about the journals, in which I published my papers. Apart from these, I did not submit any new evidence. I thought about begging people whom I am not familiar with for reference letters, because someone suggested that it is absolutely necessary for EB1. I just could not do it. So I just re-submit all my evidence in my first submission together with my new search results and webpage printouts. The whole package was one and half inch thick pile of paper. I organized my documents according to the format outlined in the RFE with clear labels and index. I wrote a new cover letter with 5 sections. 1. introduction and summary of my credentials. 2. 3. and 4. present evidences to claim that I satisfy criteria (v), (vi) and (viii), each section is finished with documents list to support the section. 5. conclusion.
Overall, I think I won the case by showing I have a good understanding of what EA requires for, and good submission structure or organization.
Good luck everyone. Be sure to think thorough and think hard before you write.
I basically did the response according to everyone's suggestions in my postings. I read through quite a few AAO decisions on EA cases on CIS webpage. They helped me a lot in terms of understanding what CIS is looking for when they are reviewing your submission. I think the key is that you should have a good understanding of how this process works, what each criterion requires and what CIS wants to see in your response. I think it is also important that DO NOT make any unreasonable claim in your submission. Use your common sense.
Among 10 criteria for EA, I claimed I can satisfy (v), (vi) and (viii). I think I can easily satisfy (v) and (vi) because of my extensive publications and research experience. I am kind of weak on (viii). In order to respond to my RFE, I did a freash new citation search on 15 of my main publications. Be sure to mark out those citation hits happened after your initial submission. These evidences do not count according CIS rules. I also presented a lot of internet search results about the journals, in which I published my papers. Apart from these, I did not submit any new evidence. I thought about begging people whom I am not familiar with for reference letters, because someone suggested that it is absolutely necessary for EB1. I just could not do it. So I just re-submit all my evidence in my first submission together with my new search results and webpage printouts. The whole package was one and half inch thick pile of paper. I organized my documents according to the format outlined in the RFE with clear labels and index. I wrote a new cover letter with 5 sections. 1. introduction and summary of my credentials. 2. 3. and 4. present evidences to claim that I satisfy criteria (v), (vi) and (viii), each section is finished with documents list to support the section. 5. conclusion.
Overall, I think I won the case by showing I have a good understanding of what EA requires for, and good submission structure or organization.
Good luck everyone. Be sure to think thorough and think hard before you write.