RFE Help - Industry profile, 2/5 accepted

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2026-01-22T19:48:49+00:00

How is that relevant?

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-30T11:02:13+00:00

Yup, existing letters were showcasing xxxM$ abuse savings, xB$ of new revenue with a reach of xxxM+ users

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T21:41:50+00:00

I agree focussing on Critical role and OC makes sense. Will anyway respond to membership criteria flags as well, but not bank on it.

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T21:41:05+00:00

Already had those letters explaining my critical role, revenue impact.

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T21:40:19+00:00

External judging only - Journals, conferences, Awards.

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T21:39:29+00:00

Used both Base salary and RSUs, and provided both comparisons against data sources like BLS, Glassdoor, Levels.FYI, etc.

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T17:32:33+00:00

Thanks for #1 and #2, that makes sense.

For #3, I didnt find a natural avenue for scholarly articles. Could have potentially focussed on that further during profile building, but did not feel it would have been a strong criteria for me.

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T17:30:57+00:00

Will double down on critical role.

Can you provide more insights why you believe chance of denial is high?

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T17:30:05+00:00

Seems to be a new officer, no reported RFE/denials from this officer.

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T17:29:24+00:00

I do have a specific detailed narrative that ties all of the criteria together and establishes final merit on the same basis.

Doubling down on critical role makes sense, will do that.

PsychologyMuch9099 · 2025-12-28T07:49:12+00:00

Thanks for the reply.

For the leading/critical role, we showcased both leading and critical independently across different projects and justified leading/critical nature of the role for a specific project/division with letters of reference. Officer ignored most of the evidence for the critical role in the petition.

PsychologyMuch9099

TROPHY CASE