EB1 EA Got RFE from TSC

M

moden

Registered Users (C)
It is my turn. I got the email this evening at 6 PM that TSC had mailed a request for further evidence. I dont know what is in there. I will post it when it comes.
 
dont worry about, u'll get it and ur answer it. Your lucky is in TSC! Please let us know when you get teh RFE details
 
Dont worry. I too got a RFE from TSC and got an approval within 3 days of submitting the RFE. Dont waste your energies on self pity(easier said I know )Just concentrate on a good response to your RFE and it will be approved. Good Luck. s Tipotodo says, you are lucky its TSC and not NSC.
 
Thanks

Hi Tipotodo and chatterjee,
Thanks for your words. I was wondering what would be the RFE and lost sleep for most part of the night. I have some urgent things to do first and when I get the RFE I will what I can do.

By the by, how much time they give you to respond to the RFE?

Moden
 
Hi
You will get ~90 days
Good luck

moden said:
Hi Tipotodo and chatterjee,
Thanks for your words. I was wondering what would be the RFE and lost sleep for most part of the night. I have some urgent things to do first and when I get the RFE I will what I can do.

By the by, how much time they give you to respond to the RFE?

Moden
Click to expand...
 
Here is the RFE

This is what the RFE says

You are petitioning for classification under section 203(b)(1)(A) of the immigration and Nationality act as an alien of extraordinary ability. The regulations governing this classification require evidence that prizes and awards be "nationally or internationally recognized". Published material about the beneficiary must be through "major" trade publications or "major" media. The beneficiary’s contributions to the filed must have been "major". On a whole, the evidence must indicate that the candidate has achieved a level of renown or expertise such that he or she is one of the few who have risen to the very top of the field.

You have submitted evidence of your participation in a number of events wherein you performed in your filed, but the evidence is not clear in meeting the criteria delineated above. Please submit the following additional evidence:

1. Further evidence that your awards have national or international recognition. Who is eligible to compete for the awards, and from what geographic area are candidates drawn? What are the criteria for receiving the awards? What are the histories of the awards? Have renowned individuals received the awards? How are the awards otherwise distinguished as being nationally or internationally recognized? Please respond in detail and submit evidence in support of your response.

2. Further evidence that the events in which you performed have a distinguished reputation. Submit evidence of the level of media coverage the events received, evidence of participation in the events by renowned individuals, evidence of the criteria used in determining who is eligible to participate, and any other evidence that te events are distinguished. If renowned individuals participated in the events submit evidence of those individuals' renowned and acclaim.

3. Further evidence that the media who have treated your work are themselves "major". How can the publications that have carried articles about you be regarded as "major" (through, for example, having a large readership or wide circulation, or a history of treating only those who are nationally or internationally renowned?). Please respond in detail and submit evidence in support of your response.

4. Further evidence that your publications are of major significance to your profession. For example, how has your work benefited your profession or other interests? Please respond in detail and submit evidence in support of your response.

5. Evidence of your membership in organizations or associations that require outstanding achievements. Include criteria for membership.

6. Evidence that you have commanded a high salary or remuneration in relation to others in your filed. Include evidence of the normal or usual level of remuneration for others in this field.


Instead of submitting three of the listed forms of evidence, you may submit evidence that you had received a major internationally recognized award. Include evidence of the renown of that award.

In addition to these, please submit further evidence that you plan to continue work in your professional filed in the US. Evidence may include, but is not limited to, documentation showing contracts or commitments for work in your filed in the US.
 
moden said:
This is what the RFE says

You are petitioning for classification under section 203(b)(1)(A) of the immigration and Nationality act as an alien of extraordinary ability. The regulations governing this classification require evidence that prizes and awards be "nationally or internationally recognized". Published material about the beneficiary must be through "major" trade publications or "major" media. The beneficiary’s contributions to the filed must have been "major". On a whole, the evidence must indicate that the candidate has achieved a level of renown or expertise such that he or she is one of the few who have risen to the very top of the field.

You have submitted evidence of your participation in a number of events wherein you performed in your filed, but the evidence is not clear in meeting the criteria delineated above. Please submit the following additional evidence:

1. Further evidence that your awards have national or international recognition. Who is eligible to compete for the awards, and from what geographic area are candidates drawn? What are the criteria for receiving the awards? What are the histories of the awards? Have renowned individuals received the awards? How are the awards otherwise distinguished as being nationally or internationally recognized? Please respond in detail and submit evidence in support of your response.

2. Further evidence that the events in which you performed have a distinguished reputation. Submit evidence of the level of media coverage the events received, evidence of participation in the events by renowned individuals, evidence of the criteria used in determining who is eligible to participate, and any other evidence that te events are distinguished. If renowned individuals participated in the events submit evidence of those individuals' renowned and acclaim.

3. Further evidence that the media who have treated your work are themselves "major". How can the publications that have carried articles about you be regarded as "major" (through, for example, having a large readership or wide circulation, or a history of treating only those who are nationally or internationally renowned?). Please respond in detail and submit evidence in support of your response.

4. Further evidence that your publications are of major significance to your profession. For example, how has your work benefited your profession or other interests? Please respond in detail and submit evidence in support of your response.

5. Evidence of your membership in organizations or associations that require outstanding achievements. Include criteria for membership.

6. Evidence that you have commanded a high salary or remuneration in relation to others in your filed. Include evidence of the normal or usual level of remuneration for others in this field.


Instead of submitting three of the listed forms of evidence, you may submit evidence that you had received a major internationally recognized award. Include evidence of the renown of that award.

In addition to these, please submit further evidence that you plan to continue work in your professional filed in the US. Evidence may include, but is not limited to, documentation showing contracts or commitments for work in your filed in the US.
Click to expand...

Any good news after you sent your RFE response to TSC.
 
Congrats tipotodo,
Usual question, How you respond to RFE.
Background, credentials, any information?
 
Working on the response

Friends
Sorry that I did not update it here that I am still working to collect supporting evidence. It will be a while before I will be able to send back my response.

Your inputs, if any would be very much appreciated.
MODEN
 
Received RFE on EB1-EA, please HELP!

Dear fellow GC applicants,

I have just received an RFE on my EB1-EA I-140 petition from NSC after I requested for the PP. I did the petition myself, and the RFE I got is a tough one. The director challenged every piece of evidence I submitted. I am very distressed by this and not exactly sure how to respond. I have typed entire text of the RFE below. I am not sure if anyboy got similar RFE as mine. Please read on. I am especially not sure how to respond to the award comment. The director doesn't think postdoctoral fellowship awards can be claimed as "Nationally acclaimed awards". I have two postdoctoral fellowship awards. If I am not considered as eligible for the "award" criteria, I will only be left with two criteria to fill in, significant contributions and publications. I may try for the memberships in association one, but the application for the associations is not very hard, so don't know if it can impress NSC. I will be very grateful to any comments or advice from my fellow GC applicants.

The RFE from CIS:

Extraordinary ability is defined as "a level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." You must submit additional evidence which clearly demonstrates that you have sustained national or international acclaim and that your achievements have been recognized as extraordinary by others in the field.

You have submitted evidence of your receipt of fellowships, postdoctoral fellow awards and a travel award. Such awards are not the type of award for hwich established scientists in your field would compete, and therefore cannot demonstrate your standing in the field as a whole. Please submit evidence of your receipt of nationally or internationally recognized awards for which you would have been competing against others in yoru field respective of their career stage.

You have submitted evidence that you belong to several associations in your field. Please submit documentary evidence of the requirements which must be met for membership in each of these associations.

You have submitted evidence that you have six published articles, one book chapter from 1998 through 2006, and several published abstracts of conference presentations. Please explain how this publication record demonstrates that you rank among the very top of your field of endeavor.

As evidence of your original scientific contributions, you submitted letters from others in your field. Many of these letters appear to be from individuals you have known through your schooling or work collaboration. IN addition, most of these letters appear to address your contributions as they would justify a waiver of the job offer in the national interest, but fall short of establishing that they have garnered you sustained national or international acclaim. You also submitted evidence that others have requested your bioinformatic computer program, which would indicate that others have noticed your work, but not that they have incorporated it into their own work or that it has been widely adopted in the field. Please submit additional evidence that would indicate that others in your field view your accomplishments as placing you in the small percentage at the top of your field. Evidence that those outside the alien's circle of colleagues and acquaintances consider the work important is especially valuable.

I will be grateful to any suggestions.

Thanks a lot.
 
srmada said:
Congrats tipotodo,
Usual question, How you respond to RFE.
Background, credentials, any information?
Click to expand...

I am dancer, I've worked in the filed for years, I've travled and performed in more then 16 countries, had articles from various publications from around the world that mention me by name, I am part of the master faculty in some of the most important dance schools in the states.

One of the hardest things that USCUS questioned was my age, iam 24 AND They kept saying that I am way to young to be on the top of my field, but me and my lawyer worked that , proving that in my field of dance, you reach the higest level form 20 to 30's giving examples of other famous dancers. I also submmited letters from the most importants dance schools in the country.

They also said that alot of my letters where form people that worked with me, but my lawyer answerd that IN GOOD WAY. Saying since I am on the top of my field, I've worked with ALL th top of the field since everyone in the top wrote me letters. Pretty simple. My RFE had the 10 cirteria and it also included extra info in 4 of them. It wa svery specific, talking about my age, about translations of articles about the letters and about my salary.

I know all of us have diferent fields, but hope this info helped you!!!!
Good luck!!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Jomia,
Does the NSC officer call the ppl in ur reference letters? If the officer can get convinced by talking to those ppl then it really helps.

As many folks mentioned, in ur RFE, provide a good cover letter that you are the top in your field.
 
jomia said:
Dear fellow GC applicants,

I have just received an RFE on my EB1-EA I-140 petition from NSC after I requested for the PP. I did the petition myself, and the RFE I got is a tough one. The director challenged every piece of evidence I submitted. I am very distressed by this and not exactly sure how to respond. I have typed entire text of the RFE below. I am not sure if anyboy got similar RFE as mine. Please read on. I am especially not sure how to respond to the award comment. The director doesn't think postdoctoral fellowship awards can be claimed as "Nationally acclaimed awards". I have two postdoctoral fellowship awards. If I am not considered as eligible for the "award" criteria, I will only be left with two criteria to fill in, significant contributions and publications. I may try for the memberships in association one, but the application for the associations is not very hard, so don't know if it can impress NSC. I will be very grateful to any comments or advice from my fellow GC applicants.

The RFE from CIS:

Extraordinary ability is defined as "a level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." You must submit additional evidence which clearly demonstrates that you have sustained national or international acclaim and that your achievements have been recognized as extraordinary by others in the field.

You have submitted evidence of your receipt of fellowships, postdoctoral fellow awards and a travel award. Such awards are not the type of award for hwich established scientists in your field would compete, and therefore cannot demonstrate your standing in the field as a whole. Please submit evidence of your receipt of nationally or internationally recognized awards for which you would have been competing against others in yoru field respective of their career stage.

You have submitted evidence that you belong to several associations in your field. Please submit documentary evidence of the requirements which must be met for membership in each of these associations.

You have submitted evidence that you have six published articles, one book chapter from 1998 through 2006, and several published abstracts of conference presentations. Please explain how this publication record demonstrates that you rank among the very top of your field of endeavor.

As evidence of your original scientific contributions, you submitted letters from others in your field. Many of these letters appear to be from individuals you have known through your schooling or work collaboration. IN addition, most of these letters appear to address your contributions as they would justify a waiver of the job offer in the national interest, but fall short of establishing that they have garnered you sustained national or international acclaim. You also submitted evidence that others have requested your bioinformatic computer program, which would indicate that others have noticed your work, but not that they have incorporated it into their own work or that it has been widely adopted in the field. Please submit additional evidence that would indicate that others in your field view your accomplishments as placing you in the small percentage at the top of your field. Evidence that those outside the alien's circle of colleagues and acquaintances consider the work important is especially valuable.

I will be grateful to any suggestions.

Thanks a lot.
Click to expand...

First of all if you can give information on your credentials subimtted will help others to comment.
I am not discouraging, but it is really important now that you have to answer all or atleast some of their concerns, which purely depends on your achievements.
My suggestions are:
1. Get more independent letters, preferably drafted well, and highlighting your work and yourself one of the top in your area of research. Strong reference letters, with very suitable wordings, you can find it in this forum, very essential to convience NSC, they are the most notorious centers of USCIS. so be careful in dealing with them. They are good even in picking up word by word from your letters.
2. submit all citations, the papers has cited your work, highlight where it has been cited in the paper, if possible try to talk more about your journal papers , how top they are in your area of research.
3. Get more informatin form associations, and if you are student member ask them to upgrade to a full membership, talk to them and most people give a good letter with the criteria for membership. Go for the top class of membership always. Also try to get some statistics, like ---no of people applied and only ---got mmbership. Try to be member in at least 2-3 associations (exclude sigma xi).
4. Do not try to use post doc fellowship as awards, they never consider that, nothing below Nobel prize or similar to that- only 10 people in the world gets.
so try to avoid that one and stress on other criterias.
5. If you are a refreee for journals, get letters from editors and ask the editor to say few words that only extraordinary people in this field are selected for this journal as reviewer. try to say some points on the quality of the journal too.
6. Stress about the importance of your publications and impact all over the world, if possible your work importance and significance, for example,to human health and whether NIH or any govt organizations are supporting such projects.
I hope this will give you some idea and many of our colleagues can help you withadditional information.
Good luck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks good_y (in behalf of both Moden and myself) you've always been very responsive and helpful. It seems RFE from TSC might be less harsh but more general than those from NSC and therefore no easier to answer (will post my case later). I think Moden needs to find another criterion to replace the "award." Have you been a journal reviewer?

Also one simple question for good_y: when writing your cover letter did you (your lawyer) respond point by point (in an itemized fashion) in the original RFE? I mean, when you used your further evidence you listed did you select 3 out of the points and elaborated on them just like a fresh case, as if the arguments in your original petition had no weight at all?

good_y said:
First of all if you can give information on your credentials subimtted will help others to comment.
I am not discouraging, but it is really important now that you have to answer all or atleast some of their concerns, which purely depends on your achievements.
My suggestions are:
1. Get more independent letters, preferably drafted well, and highlighting your work and yourself one of the top in your area of research. Strong reference letters, with very suitable wordings, you can find it in this forum, very essential to convenience NSC, they are the most notorious centers of USCIS. so be careful in dealing with them. They are good even in picking up word by word from your letters.
2. submit all citations, the papers has cited your work, highlight where it has been cited in the paper, if possible try to talk more about your journal papers , how top they are in your area of research.
3. Get more informatin form associations, and if you are student member ask them to upgrade to a full membership, talk to them and most people give a good letter with the criteria for membership. Go for the top class of membership always. Also try to get some statistics, like ---no of people applied and only ---got mmbership. Try to be member in at least 2-3 associations (exclude sigma xi).
4. Do not try to use post doc fellowship as awards, they never consider that, nothing below Nobel prize or similar to that- only 10 people in the world gets.
so try to avoid that one and stress on other criterias.
5. If you are a refreee for journals, get letters from editors and ask the editor to say few words that only extraordinary people in this field are selected for this journal as reviewer. try to say some points on the quality of the journal too.
6. Stress about the importance of your publications and impact all over the world, if possible your work importance and significance to human health and whether NIH or any govt organizations are supporting such projects.
I hope this will give you some idea and many of our colleagues can help you withadditional information.
Good luck.
Click to expand...
 
Eb1

good_y,

You have been extremely helpful on this forum. I have a request. Could you please share your letters of support and send me as an example as many times suggested by you that they should be in a proper format.

I will be grateful.

Thx,
KK(safe787@yahoo.com)
 
Eclipse said:
Thanks good_y (in behalf of both Moden and myself) you've always been very responsive and helpful. It seems RFE from TSC might be less harsh but more general than those from NSC and therefore no easier to answer (will post my case later). I think Moden needs to find another criterion to replace the "award." Have you been a journal reviewer?

Also one simple question for good_y: when writing your cover letter did you (your lawyer) respond point by point (in an itemized fashion) in the original RFE? I mean, when you used your further evidence you listed did you select 3 out of the points and elaborated on them just like a fresh case, as if the arguments in your original petition had no weight at all?
Click to expand...

I did not get the letter from my attorney yet, but he told me that he has made a point by point and also have included in his arguments with the law points that substantiate my eligiblity for extraordinary categoy. It is always better to stress, but not limited to just 3, on points where you can be an outstanding or extra ordinary researcher. Even you can site that 'to see additonal information please see -exhibit X---in my preliminary submission.
Good luck with your RFE
 
kku said:
good_y,

You have been extremely helpful on this forum. I have a request. Could you please share your letters of support and send me as an example as many times suggested by you that they should be in a proper format.

I will be grateful.

Thx,
KK(safe787@yahoo.com)
Click to expand...

Thanks, see that I have posted previously the point by point suggestion to prepare a letter. It is quite difficult to imitate one letter, as the main target of explantion is your area, and talk about you, unless we both work in the same area, I do not think my letters will help you. I have prepared the letters myself, based on the points I have previouly posted. I will look into my files and if I can find a model letter, I will send to you.
 
Thanks Good_y.
I do understand that the wordings revolve around the field but if you do find any model letter (you may delete your name any specific info) please do share one.

Tx again.
Kk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top