RFE for EB1-OR

hariprasad77

Registered Users (C)
Hi,

I got my RFE in hand yesterday. They have listed the 6 criteria, and acknowledged receipt of documents for most of them. I understand most of them, but still had a few questions:

(a) The record contains evidence of beneficiary's participation as a judge of others' work in the field. Please submit documentation of the criteria for selection as a judge, panelist, reviewer, etc. Please submit documentary evidence to establish how the beneficiary's participation is uncommon or otherwise noteworthy relative to others who participate in similar activities.

A little confusing. I reviewed some papers for a good journal, and I thought that was simply the criterion. Does someone need to be an "outstanding" reviewer as well?

(b) Service acknowledges receipt of several letters regarding the beneficiary's original contribution in the field. Now, please submit documentary evidence (not additional letters) which corroborate the statements made in the letters. Be sure to include any articles written about the beneficiary's contributions and/or other documentation that substantiates the claims made in those letters.

I submitted 7 or 8 letters, and most of them were from people I had not worked with. They had cited my work in their papers (mostly as a reference... there was not much dicussion about the details of my work).
In the letters, they praised my work and mentioned that it is very useful and important research. How should I respond to this? How do I substantiate their statements that my research is useful, etc?

(c) The record contains evidence of the awards and prizes. Now please submit documentary evidence about the criteria for the award/prize, etc...

I assume I need to prove that the award is an international one (this is true), and that all researchers are eligible, not just students. Actually, this award was given by the funding agency, so all researchers funded by them are eligible.

Thanks a lot for your help.
-hari
 
(a) You can ask for a letter from editor to state that only researchers well known in their field is required to review manuscripts. You can yourself prepare one and explain your situatio. They normally sign it without any issue.
(b) You can refer to their citations
(c) well just state the fact as you know it. You might ask for a letter from someone in the award committe to state the criterea. Or you can prepare the letter and ask them to sign it if they find it OK.

Which center did you send your application? and When?
 
Hi,

I got my RFE in hand yesterday. They have listed the 6 criteria, and acknowledged receipt of documents for most of them. I understand most of them, but still had a few questions:

(a) The record contains evidence of beneficiary's participation as a judge of others' work in the field. Please submit documentation of the criteria for selection as a judge, panelist, reviewer, etc. Please submit documentary evidence to establish how the beneficiary's participation is uncommon or otherwise noteworthy relative to others who participate in similar activities.

A little confusing. I reviewed some papers for a good journal, and I thought that was simply the criterion. Does someone need to be an "outstanding" reviewer as well?

Very simple buddy! just get letters from editors saying why they have selected you ........you will amazed how they will help you!! Ther eis no harm is teling them what are your expectations while requesting letters

(b) Service acknowledges receipt of several letters regarding the beneficiary's original contribution in the field. Now, please submit documentary evidence (not additional letters) which corroborate the statements made in the letters. Be sure to include any articles written about the beneficiary's contributions and/or other documentation that substantiates the claims made in those letters.

I submitted 7 or 8 letters, and most of them were from people I had not worked with. They had cited my work in their papers (mostly as a reference... there was not much dicussion about the details of my work).
In the letters, they praised my work and mentioned that it is very useful and important research. How should I respond to this? How do I substantiate their statements that my research is useful, etc?

Did anybody filed any patent quoting your work in back ground...explain to them how that patent can be beneficial............did anybody else got good grant using your work in background....projects suhc importance and show documentry evidences...

(c) The record contains evidence of the awards and prizes. Now please submit documentary evidence about the criteria for the award/prize, etc...

I assume I need to prove that the award is an international one (this is true), and that all researchers are eligible, not just students. Actually, this award was given by the funding agency, so all researchers funded by them are eligible.

But you need to show international nature by detailing nature of authority giving awards, competition and validity...
all the very best


Thanks a lot for your help.
-hari

good luck
 
Congrats hari. Can you please share how you responded to the questions?

For (1), did you get letter(s) from journal editors?
For (2), did you get additional letter(s) from those who cited your work? You mentioned that most of the citations were footnote citations rather than discussions. Did you have to draft the letters or did the writers did themselves?

Thanks a lot.
 
No, I did not get letters from journal editors. I think my lawyer just reiterated the fact that I was asked to review.

Also, I drafted all the letters.

Blueone,

My case was at Nebraska, filed 02/04/2008.
 
Top