how to respond to RFE's comments on major prize

[waptt]

hello gurus on the forum.

my EB1-b got a RFE and the first things they commented is that I claimed to have win some major prizes. The prize I listed was some graduate fellowships and NSC does not like them. Clearly, there is little room to argue against their comments. But how to word my reply smoothly?

option A: do not mention (i.e., ignore) their comments in the reply at all. Instead, just argue that I meet two other criteria.

option B: write explicitly that "We concur that it is difficult to establish the international scope of these prize. These prizes was mentioned in the previous petition just to show that the benefaciary has been consistently outstanding".

I feel that option A is kind of bad idea since the officer might think I completely ignore their comments. Option B, however, explicitly acknowledge previous claim are not strong, so might bring trouble". How do you guys think?

ravi

 

[ChrisV]

It never brings troubles to recognize that you were wrong.

Look at the situation this way:
- You were wrong with this graduate fellowship, and they know it whatever you are going to add.
- Now , if you recognize that you were wrong because you did not appreciate well enough how big the prize had to be to be recognized for the criterion you claimed, you don't erase your error, but at least you show that you are clever enough to now understand what is really required.

Indeed, you can use the "prize" in the evidence that you are good at what you do... though you probably did it already in your filing.

Chris