The Most Overlooked Step in a Strong O-1 Visa Petition: Contextualizing Your Evidence
- Sandra

- Nov 19
- 3 min read
Updated: Nov 19

When looking at the long list of O-1 criteria, most people assume it all comes down to one thing: the number of your achievements.
But in reality, USCIS regularly sends RFEs or even denies petitions not because the applicant isn’t accomplished enough - but because the evidence wasn’t presented with enough context.
Context is one of the most overlooked - yet most impactful - parts of a successful O-1 petition. It’s the difference between an adjudicator immediately understanding why something matters, or overlooking it entirely.
Let me break down why context matters, what USCIS actually looks for, and how to transform confusing exhibits into clear, compelling evidence:
Why context matters more than you think
USCIS adjudicators are experts in U.S. immigration policy, not experts in your field.
They review petitions from every discipline on earth: scientists, musicians, designers, technologists, founders, athletes, architects, performers, marketers, and much more.
This means:
They don’t know the prestige of your award.
They don’t know the impact of your project.
They don’t know the reach of the publication covering you.
They don’t know how competitive your selection was.
They don't know the top players in your field.
They don't know the specific idiosyncrasies of your industry.
If you don’t explain it, they don’t know it. And if they don’t know it, they can’t approve it.
What USCIS actually needs from you to understand your case
For every piece of evidence, an adjudicator needs to quickly grasp:
1. What is this?
A grant? A feature? An exhibition? A press article? A testimonial?
2. Why does it matter?
Prestige, selectivity, difficulty, influence, impact, innovation,...?
3. What was your specific role?
Be explicit, even if it seems obvious.
4. How does it tie to the O-1 criteria?
Each item must support a specific regulatory category.
If any one of these is unclear, the strength of the evidence collapses.
How to add context the right way
1. Use short, sharp exhibit descriptions
Every exhibit should include a paragraph that explains:
What the item is
Why it’s significant
Relevant metrics or prestige indicators
How it demonstrates extraordinary ability
2. Include third-party credibility markers
For example
“Featured in a publication with 2M monthly visitors.”
“Selected from over 500 applicants.”
“Awarded by a nationally recognized organization.”
“Used by institutions in X countries.”
3. Avoid industry jargon
Write for someone with zero technical background.
Instead of:“Published in a Q1 HCI venue,” say: “Published in one of the top peer-reviewed conferences in human-computer interaction, with an acceptance rate of 18%.”
4. Connect each exhibit directly to a criterion
Clearly state which criterion you're seeking to satisfy with the specific evidence and outline how you are accomplishing this.
Examples of strong vs. weak context
Weak
“This project was successful and widely used.”
Strong
“This project was adopted by three major organizations (x, y, and z), reaching over 1.2M users in its first year. It demonstrates the impact of the applicant’s work in their field and satisfies the criterion for original contributions of major significance.”
Why context is your secret advantage
Most O-1 petitions fail not because the applicant lacks achievements, but because the achievements weren’t presented in a way that meets the legal standard.
Context is your way of translating your career into language USCIS can evaluate.
It turns confusion into clarity, and clarity helps officers issue an approval.
Final thoughts
If you take one step to strengthen your O-1 petition this week, make it this:
Review your exhibits and ask whether each one would be meaningful to someone outside your field.
If the answer is no, add context - even a couple sentences can transform the strength of your evidence.
Need help making your evidence clear?
This is exactly what I do at Portico - translate your work into a compelling, legally framed narrative that USCIS can clearly understand and approve.





Comments