possibilities for EB1A

S

ssssk

Registered Users (C)
Hi,
I am new to this forum. I am a postdoc. my area of research is biochemistry. I have 17 journal publications (all are first author publications) and 5 conference abstracts ( 3 of the are first authored). I have about 140 citations. I have reviewed 6 journal articles for 3 different international journals. I have obtained 7 reference letters all from USA. 3 of them independent letters. Please let me know the chance of getting EB1.

sssk
 
Those are pretty good credentials but most be presented properly to USCIS.

See my reponse in the following thread:
http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?p=1681619#post1681619

The other important thing is to deemphasize that you are a post-doc. This is a common mistake, for post-docs to apply for EB-1 without de-emphasizing the fact, because a "post-doc" by definition cannot be a scientist who has risen to the top of his/her field.
 
Thanx jk0274,

I was invited by the two editors to review the manuscripts in their corresponding journals. I have the invitation letters. they have mentioned in the letter that this invitation is based on my experties. I have reviewed manuscripts for 3 different international peer-reviewed publications.

As I mentioned I have 17 first author publications. Out of them 2 are well cited ( about 35 and 30). They are also the topmost journals in the field with impact factors about 10 and 5.7. All other publications have impact factors above 3.0.

I have 7 good reference letters. The three independent letters stronlgy support my research.


ssssk
 
You have pretty decent credentials for EB-1EA. Give it a shot, but make sure you present your credentials properly.
 
Yes, it's definitely worth a shot, but must be presented very well. YOu must consider yourself a top applicant and convince the USCIS (with all your evidence) that you are among the top in your field, even if you actually are not. That's how most people get approved. Good luck.
 
Hi,
I guess all your letters are from U.S. If you can one or two letters internationally that might make things stronger. Reviewing international journals alone might not be sufficient for some officers.
Jk0274: I understand a postdoc might not be able to come to the top of his field that easily. Since USCIS does not mention anything about the basic qualification for EB1EA, if one has significant and outstanding contribution to the field as a postdoc itself compared to a faculty (just an example) will that be a stronger argument????.......or .......
Do you think it is more harm than help???
 
Hi Guys,
thanx for your suggessions. startrek2005, I shall try to get one or two letters from Canada or Europe. I shall give a shot and see


ssssk
 
startrek2005 said:
Hi,
I guess all your letters are from U.S. If you can one or two letters internationally that might make things stronger. Reviewing international journals alone might not be sufficient for some officers.
Jk0274: I understand a postdoc might not be able to come to the top of his field that easily. Since USCIS does not mention anything about the basic qualification for EB1EA, if one has significant and outstanding contribution to the field as a postdoc itself compared to a faculty (just an example) will that be a stronger argument????.......or .......
Do you think it is more harm than help???
Click to expand...

One can easily contribute immensely to their field even if they are post-docs. Post docs have frequently come up with very useful and widely recognized discoveries, and after all, Watson and Crick were relatively junior fellows when they discovered the double helix. But if somebody has indeed achieved as much, then there is really no need to emphasize that the person is a post-doc. Remember, I don't say post-docs shouldn't apply, I said that they should not emphasize it. In other words, when one if filling out USCIS forms, the profession should be listed as, for example, "scientist" or "research scientist" instead of "post-doctoral fellow". When one gets letters of recommendation, they should not contain text such as "Dr. Zhou is one of the brightest post-doctoral fellows in my laboratory" but rather "Dr. Zhou is one of the brightest scientists I have worked with", and so on. That's what I meant!

I don't know if something like "This post-doc's achievements outshine those of more senior faculty in his institution." I would instead write something like "This scientist's achievements have gained him great recognition that easily eclipses not only his peers but other scientists who are at more senior posts in their careers" and follow that up with patents, CV, and list of awards as evidence.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What I have seen in some of the appeals cases online is the USCIS opinion that a post-doc position is a trainee position, (they quote the definition of a post-doc from NSF or some other group... I can't recall) meant to prepare a scientist for life as a prinicipal investigator; thus you couldn't possibly be at the top of your field if you are still in training.

Which really, if you think about it, is right. What many have been able to do though is present their case in a way that emphasizes achievements and work that made an important contribution. I think it's harder for folks who don't have a lot of first author pubs or invited presentations (ie stuff that was not "passed down" from their mentor, but legitimately given to them.

Good luck!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top