Sample Cases from our office

 We won this case following a Request for Evidence, which included requests for further documentary evidence to show that the grant awards received were considered "highly competitive" and awarded based on the applicant's outstanding achievements. We provided documentation to show that the applicant was featured in major media for his innovative work. We provided additional expert letters that reiterated the applicant truly stood out amongst his peers and more than qualified for the category. The applicant was offered a position at a very prestigious university, which has a worldwide reputation as "the best business schools in the world." Given that he was offered such a position at a very young age, this clearly identified him as "outstanding."  

To give you folks an idea of what gets through easily. We won a case for a chemist with over 14 years of teaching and research experience. This applicant was the author of over 63 peer-reviewed research publications and presented his work at 17 conferences and symposia. He was also invited to present at a multitude of seminars. This applicant authored 5 book chapters and technical proceedings. He qualified for the category based on his extensive publication record as well as his acting as a judge of others' work. He performed peer reviews of manuscripts for Journal American Chemical Society, Journal Physical Chemistry and Journal of Computational Chemistry and participated as an organizer/coordinator for various international conferences. He also received prestigious fellowship awards and was featured in Marquis Who's Who in Science and Engineering.

We won this case following a response to a Request for Evidence. Service requested further clarification on the "permanency" of the job offer, which was with a University. We submitted an official job offer letter as well as the copies of the university personnel manual and administrative handbook. Service had requested additional evidence to show "international reputation" of the applicant. We submitted various letters from leading experts from around the world that described the outstanding work performed by the applicant and its significant impact on the field. Service also requested further clarification on criteria for the awards received by the applicant as well as the membership qualification for her professional memberships. We submitted documentary evidence outlining the criteria meeting Services' requirements.

 We won this case following a response to a Request for Evidence. Service requested further clarification on the "permanency" of the job offer, which was with a University. We submitted the HR policies/procedures documentation to show that the position was permanent and met the Service requirements. Letters from the HR as well as the Department were submitted to show that the position would continue and that funding was available to support this position. Applicant had over twenty-three years of research experience and as a result had a vast list of notable publications and presentations of her research. We provided documentary evidence to show the significant impact her research had on the field. She had an extensive list of noteworthy academic awards and fellowships at very prestigious research universities. We were able to provide expert letters from very prominent institutes in the world that highlighted her work as undoubtedly innovative, pioneering and as having significant impact on the field.

 

We won a case for a Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry as an Outstanding Researcher. This applicant had over 22 years of research experience in the field and was a noted expert. We submitted documentary evidence to show his multiple patents and the commercialization of his patented work. We also provided extensive documentation to show his significant publication record and the multitude of citations resulting from his innovative and pioneering work. This applicant also qualified as a reviewer for several international scientific journals. It was noted in his reference letters that due to his high level of expertise, he was considered one of the best in his field, and consequently was invited on numerous occasions to evaluate manuscripts for publication. We claimed qualification in 3 components of the category: publications, contributions and judge of others work.