Nasty EA RFE

M

madmonkey

Registered Users (C)
hi Folks

After 15 months of wait, I got a nasty RFE from NSC on my EA I-140. Before I get to that, here is my brief case: MS,PhD in engineering from US univ, 3 years post-doc in federal govt lab, followed by position in the same lab through conuslting company. 14 journal papers, some 20 or so conference papers, 40 citations at time of submission (Sept 2006), served as reviewer for some journals (reviewed about 20 papers), organizing committe member in conferences, 9 reco-letters (2 from my lab, one from different govt lab, 3 from academia, 3 from industry, some of those from people I dont know). Have attorney (who specializes in EA and NIW) etc.

The RFE asks for more evidence on most categories:

1. Published material about the alien: Here I have science related websites and magazine that describe my work - and they in fact quote me there, but the IO claims that it is not about the alien and his work. The IO says "mere reference to the alien or inclusion of the alien in publications is insufficient. There must be some sort of significance attached to being in that publication". My point is that the entire article is about my work - i guess he didnt read it or I/my attorney didnt make a good point.

2. Judge of other's work: I have served as revewier for several journals, served in standard committees etc. IO wants to know the "notoriety of the people who I reviewed" - whether the papers were authored by people of any significance.

3. Evidence of scholarly contribution: Here the IO wants further evidence of the impact of the work. Specially evidence that the work is internationally acclaimed.

4. Again in authorship of papers: IO wants impact of papers. We did carefully document impact factor of journals and citations and carefully supported our claims through expert testimony and other statistics (most downloaded etc etc).

5. Leading role in organization: IO wants organizational chart showing where and how my role plays a part.

6. Awards and membership - the usual stuff - that this is not the greatest. But my attorney never claimed this as a category we are meeting.
 
Dear Madmonkey,

Please don't be disheartened - I know, from personal experience with my EA, how upsetting it can be when the IO minimizes our accomplishments, which are viewed to be 'top of the field' by academia. My RFE (NSC) was very similar, actually more detailed. You can track my responses in other posts here. Briefly, I had some more letters. I also had a similar issue about an article about my work - I re-iterated that it was all about me. Some of it is just repeating what you said before. As for reviewer responsibility, I had the journals write me letters of acknowledgement for my role as reviewer.

It's a do-over, and it's frustrating, but your qualifications are outstanding so I'll bet it will work out. Then, you can join the rest of us sad folk in the interminable I-485 queue :)

Good luck!
 
This is really nasty. And moreover you were waiting for more than a year after filing I140.

You are already outside processing time.
 
What a ridiculous abuse of talent...!

We have to continue the struggle madmonkey...

Did you hear anything about your NIW?
 
Hi JerIst - sorry to hear about your RFE. I have not heard anything yet on my NIW. Had another LUD last week. Keeping fingers crossed.

Waitabit, thank you for your kind words. You have given me some hope now.

btw, i have to reply by Jan 30. so not much time remaining.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Waitabit

I was reading your postings, and my RFE is very similar to yours. Wonder if you can guide me through this - provide some details.

In section on Exhibition: did you include conference proceedings there? Did you also include that under authorship of scholarly articles?

Judge of Work: any description you can give on the letters from the editors of journals that you got?

Thanks
 
To madmonkey:

Your background is very strong!! Sorry to know you got a REF. One should convince the immigration officer the applicant is internationally recognized, perhaps your attorney has not well orgranized the materials or there was something else we could not control.....

I am not a lawyer and the following is only FYI.

2. Judge of other's work: The lists of journals name and papers titles and affliliations, review invitation letters....

3. Evidence of scholarly contribution: did you got some recommendation letters from other developed countries from European, Japan, Australia and so on ...

4. Again in authorship of papers: Of course the journal impact is important to support the claim. But your paper impact is most important such as its influence in your area and related areas, already used by others or heighly praised .... By the way, are you the first author of papers?

5. Leading role in organization: the information about this organization (international? how large? famous?), the lists of organizing committe member in conferences and when, where, how about the conference level and your role.....

Hope you get approval notice very soon!

best wishes,
whyregister
---------------------
Eb1a 140: RD (NOV 2006), AD(DEC 2007, NSC)
485: request of relinking submitted (DEC 2007)

NIW 140: RD (JUL 2006), AD(NOV 2006, TSC)
485: RD (JUL 2007)
 
madmonkey said:
Hi JerIst - sorry to hear about your RFE. I have not heard anything yet on my NIW. Had another LUD last week. Keeping fingers crossed.

Waitabit, thank you for your kind words. You have given me some hope now.

btw, i have to reply by Jan 30. so not much time remaining.
Click to expand...

Madmonkey - just emailed you with details and sample letters - please let me know if you have questions.
 
Waitabit and madmonkey - sorry to hear about your RFEs. I was browsing through the older posts and came across this. I am now unsure about my case - I have similar credentials to yours.

Initially just reviewing was accepted, then they wanted proof you reviewed an unusually large no. of articles, now they want to know the level of authors who you reviewed.

Similarly initially only authorship was required, then first authorship, then several papers, the letters saying they were of great impact, now they want actual impact?

Dont know where this will end. Seems they are getting stricter by the minute.
 
true - but waitabit was able to get throught it - now my turn. Waitabit has helped me a lot...am getting my RFE response ready now. Deadline is Jan 30. Will keep you posted on how it goes.
 
Oh ok. Waitabit - I didnt know you got it through. congratulations on getting through and Madmonkey - good luck with your application.
did you and waitabit do self petioning or go through attorney?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top