Sample case · fictional petitioner
See which objections your evidence already addresses
Assess checks your profile against the objections officers have raised in past NIW decisions, prong by prong, and shows what kinds of evidence have tended to answer each one.
You are looking at a sample. Dr. Lena Sample (fictional) is not a real person. The results below come from the same rules that run on your own case once you sign up. Your case stays private to you.
Evidence coverage, not a prediction. This checks which kinds of evidence a profile records against objections officers have raised in past decisions. It does not judge eligibility or estimate an outcome.
Profile check on the sample case · engine rules-2026.09 · field figures from 423 NIW merits appeals in Computing, AI & data
Step 0 EB-2 eligibility
0 recorded · 0 partly · 1 not yet- Not yet addressedDegree not shown to be a U.S. advanced degree equivalent
Your degree is foreign and no credential evaluation is recorded.
What has tended to help: A detailed credential evaluation that explains its method, official transcripts and diplomas, and consistency between the evaluation, the CV and the forms.
5% of appeals in this fieldRead 22 decisions - Not applicableFive years of progressive experience not documented
Only applies to bachelor's plus 5 years' experience.
- Not applicableExceptional ability not established
You are claiming an advanced degree.
Prong 1 Merit & national importance
2 recorded · 1 partly · 1 not yet- Not yet addressedProposed endeavor too vague
Your endeavor statement is 176 characters and reads like a job description.
What has tended to help: A concrete endeavor statement naming the work, methods, intended outputs, setting and timeline, used identically across the petition, letters and statement.
41% of appeals in this fieldRead 174 decisions - Partly addressedArgued the field's importance, not the endeavor's
1 source recorded. Petitions that answered this usually tie several independent sources to the specific work.
What has tended to help: Tie national importance to the petitioner's specific work: its prospective impact on a field, region or the public, supported by documentary evidence.
20% of appeals in this fieldRead 86 decisions - Evidence recordedBenefits limited to an employer or its clients
Your description names beneficiaries beyond an employer.
8% of appeals in this fieldRead 33 decisions - Evidence recordedNo broader implications shown
Wider reach described and backed by at least one source.
54% of appeals in this fieldRead 230 decisions - Not applicableJob creation or economic claims unsupported
You are not relying on job-creation or economic claims.
- Not applicableRelied on a labor shortage
You are not relying on a labor-shortage argument.
Prong 2 Well positioned
1 recorded · 3 partly · 1 not yet- Evidence recordedSupport letters generic or unsupported
4 letters recorded, 2 independent. Each should name specific contributions and be backed by exhibits.
20% of appeals in this fieldRead 85 decisions - Partly addressedPlan or projections not corroborated
No written plan for continuing the work in the U.S. is recorded.
What has tended to help: Attach evidence behind each projection: letters of intent, funding, partnerships, prior results, and a timeline tied to them.
16% of appeals in this fieldRead 68 decisions - Partly addressedPast record does not show influence or success
11 publications and 0 patents recorded, but no evidence of how others have used the work.
What has tended to help: Show how others used the work: citations in context, adoption, licensing, independent commentary, and outcomes the work produced.
27% of appeals in this fieldRead 113 decisions - Partly addressedCitation record not persuasive
240 citations as of 2026-09-01. Raw counts alone have often been found insufficient; context (field benchmarks, citing excerpts) is missing.
What has tended to help: Put citations in context (field benchmarks, percentiles), and show excerpts of citing papers that build on the work.
12% of appeals in this fieldRead 49 decisions - Not yet addressedNo interest from users, customers or investors
No interest letters, government letters, grants or funding recorded.
What has tended to help: Letters of intent, collaboration agreements, funding, invitations, data-use agreements, and user or adopter letters.
17% of appeals in this fieldRead 72 decisions - Not applicableClaims not backed by documents
Checked when you upload a draft (exhibit citations per claim).
Prong 3 Balance of factors
3 recorded · 0 partly · 0 not yet- Evidence recordedDid not show the waiver outweighs labor certification
2 third-prong factors marked as argued.
29% of appeals in this fieldRead 123 decisions - Evidence recordedNo urgency shown
Urgency marked as argued. Officers look for time-sensitive public benefits.
5% of appeals in this fieldRead 22 decisions - Evidence recordedLabor certification not shown to be impractical
Impracticality of labor certification marked as argued.
3% of appeals in this fieldRead 14 decisions
Procedure Procedure & record
1 recorded · 0 partly · 0 not yet- Evidence recordedNot eligible at the time of filing
Degree marked as conferred before filing.
8% of appeals in this fieldRead 32 decisions - Not applicableTried to change the endeavor after filing
Applies to responses after filing.
- Not applicableEvidence submitted too late
Applies after an RFE or NOID.
- Not applicableInconsistencies in the record
Checked when you upload a draft (numbers compared with your profile).
Do this for your own petition
Create a case, fill in your profile or upload your CV for suggestions, then check your evidence and draft your outline. The research tools stay free without an account.