The document provides guidance on what to include and what not to include in letters of support submitted with a petition for a national interest waiver. Letters should specifically demonstrate the researcher's measurable influence on their field through contributions, achievements, and work cited by independent researchers. Letters should not only praise the researcher without specifics or only discuss general future benefits, ongoing projects, or benefits primarily to the researcher's employer. The letters should establish the researcher's unique accomplishments and importance to their field from top experts in the field.

1. DOES: DON’TS:
 Letters establishing that the  Letters referring to the researcher’s
researcher’s work has had a measurable work in general terms without
influence on the field of expertise by providing specific examples of the
mentioning the researcher’s specific researcher’s contributions to the field
contributions will not be given much weight
 Letters referring to the researcher’s past  Letters alluding mostly to the future
record of achievements as a way of benefit of the work will only hurt the
projection of the future benefit to the petition
U.S.
 Letters demonstrating that the  Letters discussing the petitioner’s
researcher’s work has had an influence ongoing research projects without
on the field beyond his/her immediate demonstrating the petitioner’s influence
projects. on the larger field beyond the
institutions where the petitioner has
worked.
 Letters that only demonstrate the
benefit to the researcher’s employer
will not show the national impact of the
researcher’s work
 Letters submitted with the petition  Letters submitted with the petition that
should include expert opinions of include only the testimonies of the
independent researchers who came to petitioner’s past or present
know the petitioner through his/her collaborators will not be given much
reputation and contributions to the field weight
 Letters from independent experts that

2. do not explain how the experts came to
know the petitioner’s work
 Letters demonstrating that independent  Letters from independent experts that
researchers have cited, used or merely praise the petitioner’s work
otherwise relied upon the petitioner’s without providing specific details about
findings. the petitioner’s accomplishments
 Letters coming from experts at the top
of the petitioner’s field that are specific
about the petitioner’s place in the field
and that stress the impact of the
petitioner’s discoveries.
 Letters discussing the petitioner’s  Letters referring to the petitioner’s
patents that emphasize the significance patents without discussing how
of the innovations to the field and important the petitioner’s innovations
commercial usage of the patents are to his/her field of expertise or
without a reference to whether the
patents have already been used
 Letters demonstrating that the  Letters that merely state that the
petitioner’s research accomplishments petitioner is a well-qualified scientist
are so unusual that he/she stands out
from the rest of his/her peers; cannot be
replaced by any other similarly
qualified scientist; and thus he/she
merits the benefit of a national interest
waiver.