Most applicants have heard of Authorship, Press, and Judging because they're the most commonly discussed online. But EB-1A and O-1 petitions can be built on any combination of ten recognized criteria (and EB-2 NIW is evaluated under a different three-part framework entirely). A case built on only the "popular" criteria when stronger evidence exists elsewhere is a strategy problem — not an eligibility problem.
Nationally or internationally recognized prizes for excellence in your field, judged by criteria that reflect excellence, not participation.
Membership requiring outstanding achievement, judged by recognized experts — not membership bought with dues.
Independent, editorial coverage in major media or trade publications.
Did the publication seek you out, or did your work get inserted into it?
Serving as judge or reviewer, backed by formal documentation of the invitation and scope.
Can you prove you were selected for your expertise, in writing?
Contributions that measurably influenced your field, with independent corroboration.
Evaluated on circulation, citation, and relevance, not just the fact of publication.
Would a stranger reading only your publication list call you a leading voice?
Primarily artistic and creative fields, displayed at venues of recognized standing.
Proof your role was essential to an organization or project, not just senior-sounding.
Compensation significantly above field norms, benchmarked against verifiable data.
Demonstrated commercial success through box office, sales, or comparable verifiable metrics.
EB-2 NIW petitions aren't scored against the ten criteria above. They're evaluated on three distinct questions:
Does your proposed endeavor have both substantial positive merit and broader national significance to the United States?
Are you well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor based on your background, expertise, and track record?
On balance, would the United States benefit from waiving the standard requirements of a job offer and labor certification?
Applicants often build a case around the three criteria that are easiest to talk about — Authorship, Press, Judging — while stronger evidence sits unused elsewhere. A review across all applicable criteria, not just the popular ones, is what actually determines whether a case is strong.
