For founders filing O-1A and EB-1A

See where your petition fails, before USCIS does.

Send us your draft. We check every exhibit against 72 rules drawn from the regulations, the USCIS Policy Manual and 1,362 appeal decisions, then show you the real cases that lost on the same kind of evidence.

Check your packet free See the 72 checks
Private betaEvery citation verifiedNot legal advice
Review · O-1A · Criterion 2 of 8 High risk

Membership in associations

Exhibit 14 · Accelerator acceptance letter · p. 212
  • ✕
    membership.outstanding_achievement_required Admission is an investment decision. Nothing shows it requires outstanding achievement in the field.
  • ✕
    membership.founder_networks An accelerator cohort. Selection by investors isn’t judging by experts in the field.
  • ✓
    membership.not_disqualifying_basis Not granted for a fee, a degree, or years of experience.
AAO · EB-1A · Apr 28, 2026APR282026_03B2203
“…does not persuasively demonstrate that [redacted] decision to selectively invest in startup organizations constitutes granting membership in an association to the startup’s founder.”
Quote verified against the decision text

Fix. Add written admission rules requiring outstanding achievement, applied by named experts, or ask your lawyer about moving it.

Sample report · fictional applicant · real, verified decision

1,362AAO appeal decisions read: EB-1A since 2023, O-1A since 2015
72checks, criterion by criterion, each with its legal basis
34of them written as code: same input, same answer, every time
100%of quotes matched word for word against the decision before you see them
What the appeals office keeps rejecting

Founder petitions lose on the same few things.

Startup evidence (accelerators, press about the company, traction, founder networks) runs into the same objections over and over. Here is how often each one is raised in recent decisions.

71%
Original contributions

No impact shown beyond the company’s own customers.

65%
Membership

Admission doesn’t require outstanding achievement in the field.

61%
Awards

No independent proof the award is nationally recognized.

50%
High salary

Pay isn’t compared with the field using real wage data.

49%
Critical role

The organization’s distinguished reputation isn’t shown.

46%
Published material

No circulation or readership data for the outlet.

Share of AAO decisions issued under current Policy Manual guidance that raise the issue as a deficiency, among decisions that discuss the criterion. Mostly EB-1A decisions, which share these criteria with O-1A. Keyword estimates from the decision text, being replaced by case-by-case labels.

How it works

From draft to a report your lawyer can act on.

No forms to fill in. Send the draft your lawyer is preparing, or your own evidence list, and we do the rest.

01

Send your draft

The petition PDF, or a list of your evidence. Tell us the visa and when you plan to file.

02

Every exhibit, page-cited

We pull out each piece of evidence with the page it came from. If something isn’t in the draft, we ask you instead of guessing.

03

72 checks, criterion by criterion

34 are rules written as code. 38 are focused judgments, each against a stated question and legal basis.

04

A report per criterion

Risk, the likely reason for denial, the real decisions that lost on the same evidence, and what to fix.

Why not just ask a chatbot

A chatbot gives you an opinion. This checks your evidence.

General-purpose AI will happily review a petition. It can’t tell you which rules it applied, and it can cite cases that don’t exist.

Asking a chatbotOpenMerits
The rulesImprovised from memory, differently each time 72 checks written down, each tied to the regulation or Policy Manual section it comes from
The casesMay invent decisions or misquote them Every decision cited is in our corpus, and every quote is matched word for word against it
Policy changesDoesn’t know which guidance a case was decided under Each decision is tagged with the Policy Manual guidance in force when it was decided
Your evidenceSummarizes what you pasted Every finding points to the page of your draft it came from
What it doesn’t knowFills the gap with a guess Marks it unknown and asks you

…does not persuasively demonstrate that [redacted] decision to selectively invest in startup organizations constitutes granting membership in an association to the startup’s founder.

AAO non-precedent decision · EB-1A · April 28, 2026
Read the decision on uscis.gov ↗

Ask it anything

“Does my accelerator count as membership?”

Usually not on its own. The appeals office has rejected this argument in several recent decisions. Being chosen for investment is not the same as admission to an association that requires outstanding achievement, judged by experts in the field.

Follow-up questions run through the same checks and the same decisions, so every answer comes with the cases behind it.

The checks

Every criterion, checked separately.

Each check has a plain-English question, the rule it rests on, a severity, and the fix when it fails. The count shows how many checks run on each criterion.

Whole petition16 checks
Awards6
Membership5
Published material6
Judging4
Original contributions7
Scholarly articles5
Critical role5
High salary5
Comparable evidence4
Final merits5
Arts4
Your documents

Your draft is yours.

A petition holds your passport, salary and investor details. We treat it that way.

Used for your report only

Your draft is read to produce your report and for nothing else.

Deleted after

Your PDF is deleted as soon as the check finishes. The report is deleted an hour later, or sooner if you ask.

Never used for training

No model is trained or fine-tuned on your documents, by us or anyone else.

Questions

FAQ

Is this legal advice?

No. It is information about how the regulations, the Policy Manual and the Administrative Appeals Office have treated evidence like yours. It won’t tell you whether to file. Decisions about your case belong with you and your immigration attorney.

Do I still need a lawyer?

Yes. Think of the report as a second read before filing. Founders use it to ask their lawyer sharper questions and to catch weak exhibits while there’s still time to replace them.

What do you need from me?

Your draft petition as a PDF, or a list of your evidence by criterion, plus the visa (O-1A or EB-1A) and your planned filing date.

Where do the decisions come from?

USCIS publishes the Administrative Appeals Office’s non-precedent decisions. We read 1,260 EB-1A decisions from 2023 on and 102 O-1A decisions from 2015 on, and leave out arts (O-1B) and support-staff (O-2) cases, which use different criteria.

Why is O-1A coverage thinner?

Far fewer O-1A decisions are published: about a hundred since 2015, against more than a thousand EB-1A since 2023. Most criteria are shared, so O-1A reports also draw on EB-1A decisions and say so. When a cited decision was made under older guidance, the report flags it.

Can’t I just ask ChatGPT?

You can, and it will sound confident. It can’t show you a fixed list of rules it applied, and it can cite decisions that don’t exist. Here, every rule is written down and every citation is checked against the decision text before you see it.

Private beta · founders first

Find the weak exhibit before the RFE does.

Upload your packet, pick the visa and your planned filing date. The form check is free and takes about a minute.

Check your packet