Alien_Simba
Registered Users (C)
Dear fellow GC applicants,
I have just received an RFE on my EB1-EA I-140 petition from CIS at CSC after anxiously waiting for 11 months. I did the petition myself. The RFE I got is a tough one. None of my arguments in my petition is standing now. The CIS attached me on all fronts. I am totally stonewalled by CIS. I feel there is an attitude in the words of the RFE. I have typed entire text of the RFE below in exact same font and format used in my RFE. My responses/comments and questions are typed in blue. Please read on. Any comments or advice from my fellow GC applicants are very much appreciated.
My Credentials:
PhD from top university in UK in 1992.
Worked 8 years at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC).
95 publications, 10 as first author.
Over 100 citations on my papers, the citation search was done in 2000.
Was awarded an NRC Award for outstanding achievement at NRC.
5 strong reference letters from PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues.
Refereed a few journal papers.
A few invited talks.
Has been working as engineer/manager at small companies in US since 2000.
Stats:
LC approved in 10/02
EB2 I-140/485 RD 11/02
Denied 7/03 due to petitioner’s inability to pay.
Appeal filed in 8/03 and pending now.
Self-petitioned EB1-EA I-140 RD 11/17/03.
RFE 10/14/04
The RFE from CIS
The petition has been reviewed and has been found to be deficient. Submit evidence that addresses the deficiencies below, or submit additional evidence relating to at least three of the categories shown in bold. In order to satisfy the initial requirements for “Extraordinary Ability”, an applicant needs to satisfy at least three of the categories below. State which categories the applicant is attempting to satisfy, and how they would qualify for the category specified. Also, separate the evidence according to each category sought.
(i) Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser national or international recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
National awards: The significance of the alien’s national awards has not been established. Submit evidence to establish the origination, purpose, significance and scope of each award, as well as the criteria used to nominate and judge the participants and award winners.
The award listed (Industrial Partnership Award) does not appear to be a national award and was given to you and your colleagues.
(My comments: I got an award as a team effort while I was working at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in 1999. The award is called Industrial Partnership Award. It is one of the awards within NRC’s Outstanding Achievement Awards Program. I probably need to do a better job here. I will contact NRC officials to get them write a letter about the award and explain more about it.)
(ii) Documentation of the alien’s membership…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(I have no contest here. I am a member of IEEE, and a membership fee is the only thing needed to be admitted.)
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which classification is sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation;
Published material: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the published material submitted about the alien’s work and how it has set the alien apart from others in the field as one of the small percentage of who have risen to the very top of their field. Indicate the publication’s name; if it has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed. Citation of the petitioner’s work does not establish that the articles in question are “about” the petitioner or his work.
(My comments: I have got over one hundred citations about the papers I published in the years I worked as researcher. One of my papers opened up a new direction and there are many researchers worldwide still working in that direction. That was why I got many hits in citation search. These are actually clearly stated in my strong reference letters from my PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues. How can I prove this point further? One of my papers was about a brilliant quantum-dot device I made. Many physicists conducted ground breaking experiments on it and there were new physical phenomena discovered, and therefore new theory was established because of my device. These again were clearly stated in my reference letters. Does CIS want me to go into technical details as what physics was discovered and how it was discovered? Please help me on this one.)
(iv) 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;
Judge of the work of others: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the work judged by the alien and the criteria used to choose the alien as a judge. Peer reviewing or being a referee is routine in the field. Without evidence that sets the petitioner apart from others in the field, such as evidence that he has reviewed an unusually large number of articles, received independent requests from a substantial number of journals, or served in an editorial position for distinguished journal, the Service cannot conclude that the petitioner meets this criterion.
(My comments: I am kind of weak on this one. Maybe I should plea no contest here.)
(v) Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
Original contributions: Submit evidence to establish how the alien’s work is considered original and how it has made a major contribution of significance to the field of researcher compare to all others in the field.
(My comments: The fact of lacking comments from CIS reviewer in bold form might indicate that I am doing OK in this section. He/she just wants to see more evidence. But I do not know what more I can do here. The originality and significance of my research work have been clearly stated and proved in my reference letters, the number of my publications, the number of citations I have got, the quality of professional journals in which I was able to publish my papers and my NRC award. Don't they already have a list of reputable professional journals on hand for reference so reviewers can easily identify what journal is a good one? What did they do in their professional training? how to stonewall vulnerable GC seakers? My fellow seasoned GC applicants, please help me. I am grateful for any kind of advice or comment.)
(vi) Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media;
Scholarly articles: Provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the alien’s scholarly articles in the field. Additionally, provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the professional or major trade publications or other major media that have published the alien’s scholarly articles. Indicate if the publication has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed.
(My comments: I really do not know how I can tell CIS reviewer that Applied Physics Letters, Physical Review Letters, Photonics Technology Letters and Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology are very important professional journals which are referenced by every researchers/engineers in the fields, and are collected by every technical libraries around the world. The facts that my papers were accepted by these highly selective journals prove my research work is important and significant. Again, my fellow GC applicants, please tell me what more I can do here.)
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien’s work…
Does not relate to the applicant’s field of endeavor.
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organization or establishments that have a distinguished reputation;
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(My comments: I have a lot more to say about this one too. But you might already tired of reading this long posting. Therefore, I rest my case for now. Thank you very much for your patient in reading my miserable story. I would appreciate more if you could give me some insightful advice.)
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commended a high salary…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(x) Evidence of commercial…
Does not relate to the applicant’s
I have just received an RFE on my EB1-EA I-140 petition from CIS at CSC after anxiously waiting for 11 months. I did the petition myself. The RFE I got is a tough one. None of my arguments in my petition is standing now. The CIS attached me on all fronts. I am totally stonewalled by CIS. I feel there is an attitude in the words of the RFE. I have typed entire text of the RFE below in exact same font and format used in my RFE. My responses/comments and questions are typed in blue. Please read on. Any comments or advice from my fellow GC applicants are very much appreciated.
My Credentials:
PhD from top university in UK in 1992.
Worked 8 years at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC).
95 publications, 10 as first author.
Over 100 citations on my papers, the citation search was done in 2000.
Was awarded an NRC Award for outstanding achievement at NRC.
5 strong reference letters from PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues.
Refereed a few journal papers.
A few invited talks.
Has been working as engineer/manager at small companies in US since 2000.
Stats:
LC approved in 10/02
EB2 I-140/485 RD 11/02
Denied 7/03 due to petitioner’s inability to pay.
Appeal filed in 8/03 and pending now.
Self-petitioned EB1-EA I-140 RD 11/17/03.
RFE 10/14/04
The RFE from CIS
The petition has been reviewed and has been found to be deficient. Submit evidence that addresses the deficiencies below, or submit additional evidence relating to at least three of the categories shown in bold. In order to satisfy the initial requirements for “Extraordinary Ability”, an applicant needs to satisfy at least three of the categories below. State which categories the applicant is attempting to satisfy, and how they would qualify for the category specified. Also, separate the evidence according to each category sought.
(i) Documentation of the alien’s receipt of lesser national or international recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
National awards: The significance of the alien’s national awards has not been established. Submit evidence to establish the origination, purpose, significance and scope of each award, as well as the criteria used to nominate and judge the participants and award winners.
The award listed (Industrial Partnership Award) does not appear to be a national award and was given to you and your colleagues.
(My comments: I got an award as a team effort while I was working at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in 1999. The award is called Industrial Partnership Award. It is one of the awards within NRC’s Outstanding Achievement Awards Program. I probably need to do a better job here. I will contact NRC officials to get them write a letter about the award and explain more about it.)
(ii) Documentation of the alien’s membership…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(I have no contest here. I am a member of IEEE, and a membership fee is the only thing needed to be admitted.)
(iii) Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media, relating to the alien’s work in the field for which classification is sought. Such evidence shall include the title, date, and author of the material, and any necessary translation;
Published material: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the published material submitted about the alien’s work and how it has set the alien apart from others in the field as one of the small percentage of who have risen to the very top of their field. Indicate the publication’s name; if it has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed. Citation of the petitioner’s work does not establish that the articles in question are “about” the petitioner or his work.
(My comments: I have got over one hundred citations about the papers I published in the years I worked as researcher. One of my papers opened up a new direction and there are many researchers worldwide still working in that direction. That was why I got many hits in citation search. These are actually clearly stated in my strong reference letters from my PhD supervisor, previous bosses and colleagues. How can I prove this point further? One of my papers was about a brilliant quantum-dot device I made. Many physicists conducted ground breaking experiments on it and there were new physical phenomena discovered, and therefore new theory was established because of my device. These again were clearly stated in my reference letters. Does CIS want me to go into technical details as what physics was discovered and how it was discovered? Please help me on this one.)
(iv) 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;
Judge of the work of others: Provide evidence to establish the significance of the work judged by the alien and the criteria used to choose the alien as a judge. Peer reviewing or being a referee is routine in the field. Without evidence that sets the petitioner apart from others in the field, such as evidence that he has reviewed an unusually large number of articles, received independent requests from a substantial number of journals, or served in an editorial position for distinguished journal, the Service cannot conclude that the petitioner meets this criterion.
(My comments: I am kind of weak on this one. Maybe I should plea no contest here.)
(v) Evidence of the alien’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
Original contributions: Submit evidence to establish how the alien’s work is considered original and how it has made a major contribution of significance to the field of researcher compare to all others in the field.
(My comments: The fact of lacking comments from CIS reviewer in bold form might indicate that I am doing OK in this section. He/she just wants to see more evidence. But I do not know what more I can do here. The originality and significance of my research work have been clearly stated and proved in my reference letters, the number of my publications, the number of citations I have got, the quality of professional journals in which I was able to publish my papers and my NRC award. Don't they already have a list of reputable professional journals on hand for reference so reviewers can easily identify what journal is a good one? What did they do in their professional training? how to stonewall vulnerable GC seakers? My fellow seasoned GC applicants, please help me. I am grateful for any kind of advice or comment.)
(vi) Evidence of the alien’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media;
Scholarly articles: Provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the alien’s scholarly articles in the field. Additionally, provide evidence to establish the significance and importance of the professional or major trade publications or other major media that have published the alien’s scholarly articles. Indicate if the publication has local, national, or international circulation; how often it is printed; and the number of copies printed.
(My comments: I really do not know how I can tell CIS reviewer that Applied Physics Letters, Physical Review Letters, Photonics Technology Letters and Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology are very important professional journals which are referenced by every researchers/engineers in the fields, and are collected by every technical libraries around the world. The facts that my papers were accepted by these highly selective journals prove my research work is important and significant. Again, my fellow GC applicants, please tell me what more I can do here.)
(vii) Evidence of the display of the alien’s work…
Does not relate to the applicant’s field of endeavor.
(viii) Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organization or establishments that have a distinguished reputation;
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(My comments: I have a lot more to say about this one too. But you might already tired of reading this long posting. Therefore, I rest my case for now. Thank you very much for your patient in reading my miserable story. I would appreciate more if you could give me some insightful advice.)
(ix) Evidence that the alien has commended a high salary…
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
(x) Evidence of commercial…
Does not relate to the applicant’s
Last edited by a moderator:
Congratulations! Alien_Simba. Good luck with your I485.