Got a RFE on my EB1(EA) case from NSC.
My qualification:
2004 Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from a so-so university(top 50)
20 publication, (<15 citations, most of them published in recent years)
One award (received on an international conference, first author) + a few small fellowships
7 times reivewe for three journals (4 more reivews after initial submit, do they count?)
8 reference letters (only 1 from my MS advisor, other 7 are independent)
The RFE list a huge comments on almost all items. Here I only list the three criteria I am targeting. My comments are in blue. Any suggestions? Thanks.
(i): Documentation of the aliens’ receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
Please submit additional evidence to establish the significance of all awards, the reputation of the awarding institution(s), and the specific criteria used to select the recipient. The criteria presented should include statistical information regarding the distribution frequency of the award, how many awards of a similar type were presented at the same time/same year, how many individuals competed, and the range of candidates considered. If the award is the result of a group effort, the beneficiary’s role and contribution must be established.
(ii): 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;
Additional object evidence regarding the selection process of referees for the ASME Journal of Mechanical Design in requested. Provide evidence for presentation given by your at prestigious engagements and/or seminars. This evidence should document the notoriety of the event and be accompanied by topic/speaker selection criteria. Also identify whether you were a designated keynote speaker, and invited speaker, or a visiting scholar.
(iii): Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications of other major media;
Evidence relating to this criterion has been submitted; if readily available, additional evidence showing the impact of the petitioner’s writings within the field and significance of the media would be useful. Provide a listing that identifies the number of times each of the beneficiary’s publications has been cited by other researchers. (My paper are mainly publication in two international journals. I can proivde a ltter form the editor. However the impact factor of the journal are low, one is 0.458, one is 0.325. But they are really the best journals in my filed. Our field is a small one. I know almost everybody working in the field. Should I used the impact factor? If not, how can i prove the journals are significant? Do I have to privide a citation report? My field is small, the number of average citation is low.)
The affidavits you submitted will be given full consideration, however, additional evidence from professional journals, associations and that those outside your prior and immediate circle of colleagues and acquaintances consider your work original and extraordinarily significant is especially valuable. Provide additional evidence, from individuals outside your prior and immediate circle of colleagues and acquaintances, which validate your contributions and/or professional ability as being original and extraordinary.
If applicable, please provide a copy of the published Who’s Who article regarding your accomplishments. The evidence that you submit must validate the date the article was published. Also please identify the requirements you had to fulfill to have your professional biography published within the Who’s Who of the World, e.g. dues, subscription fee, etc.
Drs. Rxxx’s and Ragxxx’s professional credentials appear to eclipse your accomplishments. Given this, please explain the basis for your conclusion and you are equally extraordinary. (do not quite understand this, Dr. Rxxx is a senoir professor from Stanford, he is really the #1 authority in my field, but in his letter, he mentioned he is my advisor's advisor. Is the officer talking about our relationship. Dr. Ragxxx is a technical fellow from the GM R&D center with no realition with me. He assgined a few papers for me to review. That is all.
You may also obtain a letter form an interested U.S. government agency, other than just a Congressional letter of support, which clearly validates the agency’s recognition of you as an alien of extraordinary ability and which explains, in detail, why you are critical to the project(s) identified.
My qualification:
2004 Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from a so-so university(top 50)
20 publication, (<15 citations, most of them published in recent years)
One award (received on an international conference, first author) + a few small fellowships
7 times reivewe for three journals (4 more reivews after initial submit, do they count?)
8 reference letters (only 1 from my MS advisor, other 7 are independent)
The RFE list a huge comments on almost all items. Here I only list the three criteria I am targeting. My comments are in blue. Any suggestions? Thanks.
(i): Documentation of the aliens’ receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
Please submit additional evidence to establish the significance of all awards, the reputation of the awarding institution(s), and the specific criteria used to select the recipient. The criteria presented should include statistical information regarding the distribution frequency of the award, how many awards of a similar type were presented at the same time/same year, how many individuals competed, and the range of candidates considered. If the award is the result of a group effort, the beneficiary’s role and contribution must be established.
(ii): 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;
Additional object evidence regarding the selection process of referees for the ASME Journal of Mechanical Design in requested. Provide evidence for presentation given by your at prestigious engagements and/or seminars. This evidence should document the notoriety of the event and be accompanied by topic/speaker selection criteria. Also identify whether you were a designated keynote speaker, and invited speaker, or a visiting scholar.
(iii): Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications of other major media;
Evidence relating to this criterion has been submitted; if readily available, additional evidence showing the impact of the petitioner’s writings within the field and significance of the media would be useful. Provide a listing that identifies the number of times each of the beneficiary’s publications has been cited by other researchers. (My paper are mainly publication in two international journals. I can proivde a ltter form the editor. However the impact factor of the journal are low, one is 0.458, one is 0.325. But they are really the best journals in my filed. Our field is a small one. I know almost everybody working in the field. Should I used the impact factor? If not, how can i prove the journals are significant? Do I have to privide a citation report? My field is small, the number of average citation is low.)
The affidavits you submitted will be given full consideration, however, additional evidence from professional journals, associations and that those outside your prior and immediate circle of colleagues and acquaintances consider your work original and extraordinarily significant is especially valuable. Provide additional evidence, from individuals outside your prior and immediate circle of colleagues and acquaintances, which validate your contributions and/or professional ability as being original and extraordinary.
If applicable, please provide a copy of the published Who’s Who article regarding your accomplishments. The evidence that you submit must validate the date the article was published. Also please identify the requirements you had to fulfill to have your professional biography published within the Who’s Who of the World, e.g. dues, subscription fee, etc.
Drs. Rxxx’s and Ragxxx’s professional credentials appear to eclipse your accomplishments. Given this, please explain the basis for your conclusion and you are equally extraordinary. (do not quite understand this, Dr. Rxxx is a senoir professor from Stanford, he is really the #1 authority in my field, but in his letter, he mentioned he is my advisor's advisor. Is the officer talking about our relationship. Dr. Ragxxx is a technical fellow from the GM R&D center with no realition with me. He assgined a few papers for me to review. That is all.
You may also obtain a letter form an interested U.S. government agency, other than just a Congressional letter of support, which clearly validates the agency’s recognition of you as an alien of extraordinary ability and which explains, in detail, why you are critical to the project(s) identified.