EB1-OR credentials evaluation

G

GC-applicant

New Member
Hi there:

Please let me know if I stand any chance of getting EB1-OR I140 approved based on the following credentials:

(1) PhD in Computer Engineering from well reputed university
(2) 3+ years of experience as a researcher in a start-up company
(3) Founding research member of the company (six researchers in total) to develop its award-winning software (software has received four major awards in one year)
(4) Awarded for extraordinary accomplishments for two years in the company
(5) 4 journal papers in peer-reviewed journals (with 10 citations)
(6) 1 research book (published by German publisher)
(7) 9 conference papers and presentations
(8) 22 patents pending with USPTO with 1 patent filed internationally in nine countries
(9) Membership in IEEE, Upsilon Pi Epsilon, and Sigma Xi
(10) Reviewer of 3 peer-reviewed journals (have reviewed 5 articles till now)
(11) 7 strong recommendation letters (4 from my graduate school, 2 from my company colleagues, and 1 from company CTO)

Negative points:
(1) No awards outside the company
(2) No published material and/or media reports about my work

I would be interested in different (and blunt) opinions from different people. If you feel that the application would be strong, that would be great to hear. But if anybody feels that the application would be weak, I would be interested to know what areas I should try to improve so that I could file the petition as soon as possible.

Thanks in advance...
 
thumbs up

I thnk you stand good chances. You meet at least three criteria. You have to present your case well.
 
I agree with dcdoc. However, I feel that 4 papers and 10 citations are not enough to claim for those items. I also believe that pending items (like patents or papers under revision) doesn't count. I would definitely check with a lawyer about your case because if it is well prepared your chances are better. It's just my opinion...
 
Thanks for your input dvilla. I really appreciate it.

I was also under impression that "pending" patents may not count. However, based on my knowledge, it generally takes around 5 years before patents are approved... The company has won 4 major awards based on the research described in those patents. Is it possible to push my petition in that direction?

Also, as you mentioned, my articles and their citations is weak. But I would like to tell the I.O. not to concentrate on them, but to concentrate on my company research. Is it a good idea to somehow mention that in the petition letter itself so that I won't run the risk of getting citation-related RFE's that would be hard to provide? In short, can I say that "don't even bother about my citations, my work at the company is far more important than looking for those citations"?

Finally, how many articles from peer-reviewed journals should I review to make it a strong criterion? Also, can I submit only the invitation letters for those reviews or do I need to submit the proof of final reviews?

Thanks again...
 
From my very limited experience as an EB applicant (EB2-NIW), EB applications (specially those based on exceptional ability) are not an exact science. So, there no minimum requirements on papers, citations, reviewing, etc. I believe that IO look at those indicators because are objectively measurable. Of course you can push his/her attention to your strongest points but you should clearly meet 3 of 10-item list and some achievements are not 'exchangeable'. You should check it out carefully!
This is because I suggested to go to someone with experience because sometimes HOW to present your case is more important than your achievements themselves.
I hope this helps...
 
But there is an overall minimum requirement that one should satisfy three of the ten criteria (for EB1-EA) applications. Sure, it all depends on how you present you case to the USCIS.
 
1) You really need to make sure that the accomplishments are about what you have done, period.
2) Your letters look weak to me. If I were you I would totally eliminate the letters from your company. They really do not mean much. If you can get letters from individual experts in the field that recognize your work, that counts. But do not exaggerate this also. Focus, focus, focus. I do not know what do you mean by letter from graduate school.
3) Focus on documentary evidence not on letters. Letters are important but without support by evidence, they do not mean much.
4) Honestly, I think you are at the edge so you need to present your case very well.


Good luck
 
GC-applicant said:
Hi there:

Please let me know if I stand any chance of getting EB1-OR I140 approved based on the following credentials:

(1) PhD in Computer Engineering from well reputed university
(2) 3+ years of experience as a researcher in a start-up company
(3) Founding research member of the company (six researchers in total) to develop its award-winning software (software has received four major awards in one year)
(4) Awarded for extraordinary accomplishments for two years in the company
(5) 4 journal papers in peer-reviewed journals (with 10 citations)
(6) 1 research book (published by German publisher)
(7) 9 conference papers and presentations
(8) 22 patents pending with USPTO with 1 patent filed internationally in nine countries
(9) Membership in IEEE, Upsilon Pi Epsilon, and Sigma Xi
(10) Reviewer of 3 peer-reviewed journals (have reviewed 5 articles till now)
(11) 7 strong recommendation letters (4 from my graduate school, 2 from my company colleagues, and 1 from company CTO)

Negative points:
(1) No awards outside the company
(2) No published material and/or media reports about my work

I would be interested in different (and blunt) opinions from different people. If you feel that the application would be strong, that would be great to hear. But if anybody feels that the application would be weak, I would be interested to know what areas I should try to improve so that I could file the petition as soon as possible.

Thanks in advance...
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I think the case looks rather weak for EB1-OR.
The publication record seems rather short for the given field. Also, having refereed only 5 papers seems a bit thin for satisfying the criterion "Evidence of the individual’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as the judge of the work of others". I think one would need either a greater number of refereeing requests or at least a few grant review requests, etc.

As other have noted above, the reference letters also are deficient as they are from only two places: your graduate school and your company. Letters from the company colleagues do not really count as they will not be seen as independent. What is really needed here are letters from a number of internationally recognized experts from different institutions and preferably from several countries.

10 citations is really small and, in my view, insufficient for satisfying the criterion "Published material in professional publications written by others about the person’s work in the academic field."

Moreover, it is not clear to me that the your job position would even qualify for EB1-OR. As I understood it, this is a position in a start-up company that you yourself were a co-founder of. My understanding is that to qualify for EB1-OR the job must be at an employer with a fairly extended record of academic accomplishments; I personally doubt that a start-up company, even a successful one, would qualify.

Frankly, I don't see much of a chance of this case being approved under EB1-OR, at least for now.
 
Thanks for your inputs baikal3 and tanaz. I really appreciate it. This is a type of criticism I was looking for. Let me reiterate few of my questions to see how I can improve my case and put forth the strongest possible case.

Although the patents are pending, our company has won 4 awards at major conferences based on the research described in those patents. Is it possible to push my petition in that direction?

Number of citations is weak, but I believe that my major contribution is my company research. Is it a good idea to somehow mention that in the petition letter itself so that I won't run the risk of getting citation-related RFE's that would be hard to provide? In short, can I say that "don't even bother about my citations, my work at the company is far more important than looking for those citations"?

How many articles from peer-reviewed journals should I review to make it a strong criterion? Also, can I submit only the invitation letters for those reviews or do I need to submit the proof of final reviews? (Since my last post, I have received 15 more review requests from 7 different peer-reviewed journals. That makes total review invitations 20.)

Finally, about the reference letters... Based on your suggestions, I am planning to take 2 letters from my MS and PhD advisers, 2 from my company colleagues (one from Technical Lead and one from company CTO), and 2 from independent sources (Associate Editors of peer-reviewed journals).

My company has already filed my petition in EB2, but as I am from India, I will have to wait too long before my priority date would be current. I am going to submit my application in EB1-OR for sure and your inputs are highly appreciated so that I can make the strongest possible case.

Thanks again...
 
First, you should keep in mind that your goal is to satisfy at least two of the following 6 criteria:


1) Documentation of the individual’s receipt of major prizes or awards for outstanding achievement in the academic field;

2) Documentation of the person’s membership in associations in the academic field that require outstanding achievements of their members;

3) Published material in professional publications written by others about the person’s work in the academic field. Such material shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation;

4) Evidence of the individual’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as the judge of the work of others in the same or an allied academic field;

5) Evidence of the person’s original scientific or scholarly research contributions to the academic field; or

6) Evidence of the individual’s authorship of scholarly books or articles (in scholarly journals with international circulation) in the academic field;


You must also prove that your employer satisfies: "For a private employer offering a permanent research position, the employer must show that it employs at least 3 full-time persons in research positions, and that it has achieved documented accomplishments in an academic field."


These are minimal requirements and a great deal depends on the discretion of the IO adjudicating an I-140 petition. In practice this means that satisfying at least three criteria (rather than the minimum two) is desirable and that the evidence you supply for satisfying them must be substantial as well. E.g. if someone has written one published article, refereed one paper and had one newsarticle written about his/her reasearch would certainly be denied even if, in the strictly literal sense, such a person would seem to satisfy criteria 3), 4) and 6)

GC-applicant said:
Although the patents are pending, our company has won 4 awards at major conferences based on the research described in those patents. Is it possible to push my petition in that direction?
Click to expand...

In principle you can try, but it will be hard. You also need to think about towards satisfying which criteria you will be pushing your petition by such an argument. Presumably criterion 5?
Also, you'll need to supply proof of significance of your individual contributions and not just the significance of the company's research.


Number of citations is weak, but I believe that my major contribution is my company research.
Is it a good idea to somehow mention that in the petition letter itself so that I won't run the risk of getting citation-related RFE's that would be hard to provide? In short, can I say that "don't even bother about my citations, my work at the company is far more important than looking for those citations"?
Click to expand...

You do need to say in the cover letter which of the 6 criteria above you are claiming to satisfy. Citations are usually used mainly as evidence of satisfying criterion 3) and, to a lesser extent, as partial evidence of satisfying criterion 5. In you case, if you are not making a claim to satisfy 3) and are claiming to satisfy 5) on other grounds, you can avoid talking about citations.


However, you should remember the following. The IOs are used to certain types of cases and certain types of arguments whereas your case is fairly non-standard (which by definition makes it harder). In particular, they don't seem to like it when people claim both criteria 5 and 6 and they expect pretty strong evidence for satisfying criterion 5: this is where letters from independent experts, conference invitations, citations, awards etc come in.



Among the above criteria, 1) and 2) do not really apply to you and you have a very weak case for 3) [based on citations], which is probably better not to make. You have a chance for satisfying 4), 5) and 6) [with the caveats mentioned above] and you should structure your application and your cover letter primarily with that in mind.

How many articles from peer-reviewed journals should I review to make it a strong criterion? Also, can I submit only the invitation letters for those reviews or do I need to submit the proof of final reviews? (Since my last post, I have received 15 more review requests from 7 different peer-reviewed journals. That makes total review invitations 20.)
Click to expand...

There is no hard and fast rule, but I would say that 15-20 total should certainly be enough. You can supply all the refereeing requests you received. For those papers where you have already submitted referee reports, you can ask the journal editors who made the original requests to you for short "thank you" notes for doing the refereeing (you can explain to them why you need such notes and they'll certainly provide them to you).



Finally, about the reference letters... Based on your suggestions, I am planning to take 2 letters from my MS and PhD advisers, 2 from my company colleagues (one from Technical Lead and one from company CTO), and 2 from independent sources (Associate Editors of peer-reviewed journals).
Click to expand...

No, that does not seem nearly sufficient to me. Letters from non-independent experts (PhD and MS advisors, company colleagues) essentially do not count and will likely be entirely discounted. You need 8-10 letters from significant independent experts in your field, preferably from several different countries.
Moreover, these letters need to discuss in detail the specific significance and impact of your individual research contributions rather than make generic statements like "X is a major expert" or "X is an excellent researcher" or "X's research has significantly affected the subject". They'd need to explain what exactly you did and why it is important.
For each person writing you such a letter you will also need to provide their full vita (to demonstrate that they are indeed a significant expert).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top