Free sample · O-1A · PDF, 7 pages
An O-1A petition letter that finds its own RFE risks before you file
Drafted by Immigration Copilot for a fictional startup CTO, Dr. Mira Kovalenko. Every sentence points to an exhibit or to the regulation, and excerpts of three exhibits at the back let you check the cites yourself. The gaps an officer would raise come back to the attorney first, while there is still time to fix them.
What is inside
- Part I: the U.S. employer, the signed contract, a three-site itinerary and the peer-group advisory opinion, each tied to the regulation that asks for it
- Criteria (1), (3), (5) and (7) argued from 28 exhibits, with a table showing which of the eight are claimed and which are not
- Criterion (8) argued through comparable evidence under (o)(3)(iii)(C): why a capped founder salary does not fit, and the 409A-valued equity that does
- The final totality argument for sustained national or international acclaim, cited sentence by sentence
- Six open questions for the attorney, two sentences flagged because no exhibit supported them, and one exhibit kept out of a criterion it does not fit
- An index of the 28 exhibits, and excerpts of three of them so you can check the cites
Sample output for a fictional case. Not legal advice and not a template for a real petition.
When a criterion does not readily apply to the occupation, the petitioner may submit comparable evidence8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(C). Dr. Kovalenko holds 4,200,000 shares of Larkspur common stockEx. 5, § 5. An independent 409A valuation set the fair market value of that stock at $2.85 per shareEx. 25, p. 7, which puts her holding at $11,970,000Ex. 5; Ex. 25.
Filing risk for the attorney: Ex. 25 is dated 31 March 2025, about 19 months before filing. Request the 2026 valuation, or a CFO letter with the latest price per share.
Four problems the draft caught before an officer could
Unsigned advisory opinion
The peer-group opinion in the file has no signature. 8 CFR 214.2(o)(5)(i)(C) requires one from an authorized official.
Press with no translation
A Polish-language profile is cited for Criterion (3), which requires any necessary translation. None is in the file.
A valuation 19 months old
The equity argument rests on a March 2025 409A report. The draft asks for a current price per share before filing.
A salary claim with no benchmark
A sentence calling the salary top-of-field was flagged: nothing in the file compares it to anyone. The draft argues (8) through equity instead.
Questions about the sample
- What is in the sample O-1A petition?
- Seven pages from a fictional O-1A petition letter for a startup CTO: the petition overview with the employer, contract, itinerary and advisory opinion; five criteria under 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B), with high salary argued through comparable evidence under (o)(3)(iii)(C); the final totality argument; an index of the 28 exhibits it cites; and excerpts of three exhibits, so you can check the sentences that cite them.
- Is the sample based on a real case?
- No. The beneficiary, company, investors, hospitals, publications, prizes and figures are invented. The regulation and USCIS Policy Manual references are real and were checked on 23 October 2026. The sample is not legal advice and not a template for a real petition.
- How does the sample use comparable evidence for a founder?
- The founder's cash salary is capped by her board, so the draft explains, from the board resolution and an investor letter, why the high salary criterion does not readily apply. It then offers her equity, valued in a 409A report, as comparable evidence. The USCIS Policy Manual (Vol. 2, Part M, Ch. 4) gives a founder's highly valued equity as an example of evidence comparable to high salary.
- Does Immigration Copilot obtain the advisory opinion?
- No. The written advisory opinion under 8 CFR 214.2(o)(5) is generally required and the attorney obtains it, from a peer group (which can include a person with expertise in the field) or a labor or management organization. If no appropriate peer group exists, USCIS decides on the record. The letter cites the opinion you upload; in the sample, the unsigned copy comes back to the attorney as a filing risk.
- Is there an EB-1A version of the sample?
- Yes. The EB-1A sample shows Criterion 5 and Criterion 6 for a fictional computational biologist, with the same exhibit cites, review notes and exhibit list.
Preparing an EB-1A instead? See the EB-1A sample cited petition