Note: Names and EMail addresses have been censored to preserve anonymity.

from: ...
date: 5 May 2015 at 15:27
subject: Re: Submission to CAG...

Dear Graham,

Thanks for the CAG submission. We will send it out for review and get back to you as soon as possible.

Best,
...

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to: ...
date: 22 July 2016 at 00:53

Dear Prof. ...,

I am writing with regard to my paper, "On complete embedded translating solitons of the mean curvature flow..." that I submitted for review in your journal a bit over a year ago (2nd May 2015). Could you please give me an update on its review status?

Thanks, and best wishes,

GS.

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to: ...
date: 25 December 2016 at 16:38

Dear Prof. ...,

I am writing with regard to my paper, "On complete embedded translating solitons of the mean curvature flow..." that I submitted for review in your journal about 18 months ago (2nd May 2015). Would it be possible for you to give me an update on its review status?

Thankyou, and best wishes,

GS.

***

from: cagjournal
to:  ...
date: 26 December 2016 at 04:16
subject: Re: Fwd: Query: Submission to CAG...

Dear Prof. Smith,

Thank you for your email. Your paper is in the process of reviewing. I will send a reminder to the referees, and will get back in touch with you after hearing from them.

Best wishes,
...

CAG Secretary

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to:  cagjournal
date: 21 March 2017 at 00:20

Dear Prof. ...,

I am writing with regard to my paper, "On complete embedded translating solitons of the mean curvature flow..." that I submitted for review in your journal almost 2 years ago (2nd May 2015). I would like to know, please, when I might expect to receive a completed review.

That said, after having noticed numerous typos and inaccuracies that could be detrimental to the understanding of the paper, I found it appropriate to prepare a revision, which you will find attached, and which I would like to ask you to forward, please, to the reviewer(s).

On the one hand, the text is sufficiently unchanged to still be readily accessible to anyone who has studied the original. On the other hand, as I have also taken the time to clarify large portions of the exposition, I believe that the revised version will be significantly easier to understand, and will thus, I hope, aid the reviewer(s) in coming to a prompt decision.

Thankyou in advance, and best wishes,

GS.

***

from: cagjournal
to:  ...
date: 21 March 2017 at 04:56
subject: Re: Re: Fwd: Query: Submission to CAG...

Dear Prof. Smith,

Thanks for the revised version of your paper! I will forward it to the referees and get back in touch with you after hearing form them.

Best wishes,
...

CAG Secretary

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to:  cagjournal
date: 21 March 2017 at 12:38

Thankyou very much. Please also remind them that all non-standard notation is fully explained in the appendix. I have tried to make this as clear as possible in the text.

Best wishes,

GS.

***

from: cagjournal
date: 23 March 2017 at 01:34
subject: Re: Re: Fwd: Query: Submission to CAG...

Dear Prof. Smith,

Sure, I will forward your email to the referees.

Best wishes,
...

CAG Secretary

***

Note: Three months later, a partial review was received. However, the review, which is available here, received almost 22 months after the original submission, barely addressed more than general questions regarding the abstract and introduction. I also found it odd that the reviewer should express surprise that the paper offers a low genus construction, since analogous constructions had already been carried out in other contexts by R. Mazzeo, F. Pacard, L. Hauswirth amongst others. My complete response to the review may be found here.

***

From: cagjournal
Date: 27 June 2017 at 08:21
Subject: CAG#1974: Referee report

Dear Professor Smith,

Attached please find a referee's report on your manuscript "On complete embedded translating solitons of the mean curvature flow that are of finite genus", that has been submitted to Communications in Analysis and Geometry for possible publication. Could you address the questions posed in the report?
Thank you.

Best wishes,
...

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to:  cagjournal
date: 4 October 2017 at 22:39

Dear Prof ...,

I am writing with regard to my paper entitled "On complete embedded translating solitons of the mean curvature flow..." that I submitted for review for publication in Communications in Analysis and Geometry.

This paper was submitted for review on the 2nd of May 2015. It has now been under review for over 29 months. A revision was submitted on the 20th March of this year. That was 6 months ago.

I think the reviewer has had enough time to decide whether to accept or reject the paper. I would therefore be grateful if you could inform me of a decision as soon as possible.

Yours,

GS.

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to: cagjournal
date: 5 October 2017 at 20:18

Thanks for this update. Should I assume that the first review has been positive then? Otherwise, there's little point in waiting for the second, is there?

Best,

G.

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to: cagjournal
date: 18 November 2017 at 03:26

Dear Prof ...,

I am writing again with regard to my paper entitled "On complete embedded translating solitons of the mean curvature flow..." that I submitted for review for publication in Communications in Analysis and Geometry.

(1) This paper was submitted for review on the 2nd of May 2015. It has now been under review for over 30 months.

(2) A revision was submitted on the 20th March of this year. That was 8 months ago.

(3) An update was requested on the 4th October. That was 6 weeks ago.

I think the reviewer has had enough time to decide whether to accept or reject the paper. I would therefore be grateful if you could inform me of a decision as soon as possible.

Yours,

GS.

***

from: Graham Andrew Smith
to:  ...
date: 24 November 2017 at 16:09

Dear Prof ...,

I am writing again with regard to my paper entitled, "On complete embedded translating solitons of the mean curvature flow..." that I submitted for review for publication in Communications in Analysis and Geometry on the 2nd of May 2015. The review of this paper is unaccountably experiencing an inordinately long delay that I would very much like to see resolved as quickly as possible. I would love to believe that my work is so entertaining that the reviewer cannot bring himself to part with it but, sadly, I find it hard to imagine that this could be the case.

Here is a timeline of the situation to date.

(1) The paper was submitted on the 2nd of May 2015. That was over 30 months ago.

(2) A revision was submitted on the 20th March of this year. That was over 8 months ago.

(3) An update was requested from "cagjournal" on the 4th October, after which I was promptly informed that the first review had been received and that a reminder would be sent to the second reviewer. That was over 7 weeks ago.

(4) A further update was requested from "cagjournal" on the 18th of November. That was almost a week ago, and I have not yet recieved a response.

I'm sure you understand the cumulative damage that such delays entail in terms of lost opportunities and lost earnings, and it is for that reason that I am asking you to please address this problem as soon as you can.

I thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

Yours,

GS.

***

From: ...
Date: 22 January 2018 at 20:52
Subject: Paper Submission...

Dear Graham,

I was told that you submitted your paper to another journal, so I will consider it withdrawn from CAG. I’m sorry for the long delay, but the experts I sent it to could not verify it.

Yours and best,