claude_immigration_attorney · juntoku9/claude_immigration

Claude Immigration Attorney

Claude Code skills for immigration attorneys and self-petitioning candidates.
Draft O-1A, EB-1A, and EB-2 NIW petitions with AI — every claim backed by evidence.

What This Is

A set of Claude Code skills that handle the most time-consuming parts of immigration petition work. Built for two audiences:

For immigration attorneys:

Organize 100+ client documents into a structured evidence index
Optionally run a pre-draft check on which criteria or NIW prongs look supportable from the index (skip if you prefer to go straight to drafting)
Optionally build a normalized publication and citation table for research-heavy O-1A, EB-1A, or NIW cases
Draft petition letters with proper legal structure, exhibit references, and evidence enrichment
Audit drafts for factual errors, unsupported claims, and legal issues before signing
Draft expert/recommendation letters with strategic criteria assignment

For self-petitioning candidates (EB-1A, NIW):

Understand what evidence you need and how strong your case is
Research government sources that support your national importance argument
Generate a first draft of your self-petition letter to review with your attorney
Identify evidence gaps before you file

Skills

Skill	What It Does
`document-summary-arrangement`	Ingests source documents (PDFs, images, scans), triages by importance, summarizes key documents, and produces a structured index arranged by evidentiary criterion
`case-strength-assessor`	Optional. Reads the document index and outputs a frank pre-draft assessment of which O-1A/EB-1A criteria or NIW prongs are strong, moderate, weak, or unsupported — use only if you want that extra pass
`publication-citation-table`	Optional. Summary table + TSV, lead picks for C5, C3 side list — from the index and optional Scholar/ORCID; tags Criterion 5 vs press (Criterion 3) and `NEEDS VERIFICATION` for publication-heavy cases
`o1-petition-narrative`	Drafts O-1A/O-1B petition support letters — criterion-by-criterion arguments with exhibit references and evidence enrichment
`eb1a-petition-narrative`	Drafts EB-1A green card petitions — same criteria as O-1A but stricter scrutiny, adds sustained acclaim totality argument, intent to continue work, and substantial U.S. benefit
`niw-national-importance-research`	Researches authoritative gov sources, national plans, and federal funding — produces a quotable research document matched to the petitioner's background
`niw-petition-narrative`	Drafts EB-2 NIW self-petition support letters using the Dhanasar three-prong framework
`expert-letter-drafter`	Drafts expert/reference/recommendation letters — assigns criteria to experts by credential, ensures no two letters overlap, produces ready-to-customize drafts
`petition-audit`	Audits any petition letter — verifies every factual claim against source documents, flags legal errors, checks internal consistency, produces severity-rated report
`rfe-response-drafter`	Analyzes a USCIS RFE, diagnoses what went wrong in the original petition, maps each deficiency to a fix, and drafts the point-by-point response with new evidence strategy

Knowledge Base

The knowledge/ directory contains best practices distilled from real cases and USCIS adjudication patterns. Skills read these files before drafting.

knowledge/
├── overview-o1a-eb1a.md       # O-1A/EB-1A standard, Kazarian framework
├── overview-niw.md            # NIW standard, Dhanasar framework
├── criteria/                  # Best practices per O-1A/EB-1A criterion
│   ├── 01-awards.md
│   ├── 02-membership.md
│   ├── 03-published-material.md
│   ├── 04-original-contributions.md
│   ├── 05-scholarly-articles.md
│   ├── 06-critical-employment.md
│   ├── 07-high-remuneration.md
│   └── 08-judging.md
├── prongs/                    # Best practices per NIW Dhanasar prong
│   ├── 01-substantial-merit.md
│   ├── 02-well-positioned.md
│   └── 03-national-interest-balance.md
├── evidence-hierarchy.md      # How USCIS weighs evidence (Tier 1–4)
├── argument-patterns.md       # Reusable argument structures
└── uscis-policy-alerts.md     # Key citations (PA-2022-03, Kazarian, Dhanasar)

Workflow

Source documents
       ↓
document-summary-arrangement → document index (arranged by criterion)
       ↓
knowledge/ (read best practices)
       ↓
o1-petition-narrative              → O-1A petition package   ─┐
eb1a-petition-narrative            → EB-1A petition package  ─┤
niw-national-importance-research   → research document        │
  → niw-petition-narrative         → NIW petition package   ──┤
expert-letter-drafter              → expert letter drafts     │
                                                              ↓
                                             petition-audit → audit report
                                                              ↓
                                                     Attorney reviews & signs

Optional, any time after the index exists (often before or during narrative drafting): case-strength-assessor — pre-draft criterion/prong strength; publication-citation-table — master publication/citation table for research-heavy petitions. Neither is required; skip if you do not need them.

Sample Output

Here's what the skills actually produce — from a real test run on the Judging criterion:

Evidence Research

Every entity is researched with facts traced to source documents and verified web URLs:

Web Source Verification

Web sources are compiled with exact quotes, retrieval dates, and attorney action checkboxes:

Petition Draft

The final draft uses ONLY sourced facts — every number has a citation:

Each petition package is a single file containing:

The full support letter draft
Source registry (every fact traced to a document or URL)
Web sources the attorney needs to print for filing
Evidence gaps and strength assessment

Quick Start

For attorneys

Install Claude Code
Clone this repo

Install dependencies:

./document-summary-arrangement/scripts/setup.sh

Point Claude at your client's documents:
```
/document-summary-arrangement
```
Optionally assess case strength from the index before drafting:
```
/case-strength-assessor
```
For research-heavy clients, optionally normalize publications and citations:
```
/publication-citation-table
```

Draft the petition:

/o1-petition-narrative     # O-1A temporary visa
/eb1a-petition-narrative   # EB-1A green card
/niw-petition-narrative    # EB-2 NIW

Draft expert letters:
```
/expert-letter-drafter
```
Audit before signing:
```
/petition-audit
```

For self-petitioning candidates

Install Claude Code
Clone this repo
Gather your documents (awards, memberships, publications, employment records, funding docs)
Index your documents:
```
/document-summary-arrangement
```
Optionally see which criteria or prongs look strong or weak before drafting:
```
/case-strength-assessor
```
If you have many papers, optionally build a publication/citation table from the index:
```
/publication-citation-table
```
For NIW — research your national importance argument:
```
/niw-national-importance-research
```

Draft your self-petition:

/eb1a-petition-narrative   # EB-1A self-petition
/niw-petition-narrative    # NIW self-petition

Audit the draft:
```
/petition-audit
```
Take the draft to an immigration attorney for review before filing.

Scripts

Helper scripts for document processing in document-summary-arrangement/scripts/:

Script	What It Does
`setup.sh`	Installs dependencies (poppler for PDF tools)
`scan-collection.sh`	Scans a directory — reports file types, sizes, page counts, batch plan
`pdf-to-text.sh`	Extracts text from PDF (auto-detects scanned vs. text)
`pdf-to-images.sh`	Converts PDF pages to PNG for multimodal reading
`docx-to-text.sh`	Extracts text from .docx (macOS/Linux)

Who This Is For

Immigration attorneys drafting O-1A, EB-1A, and NIW petitions who want structured, evidence-backed first drafts
Self-petitioning candidates (EB-1A, NIW) who want to understand their case strength, organize evidence, and prepare a draft before engaging an attorney
Legal teams that want to reduce time spent on document organization, research, and initial drafting

What This Is NOT

Not legal advice. Every output is a draft. An immigration attorney must review, edit, and sign before filing.
Not a replacement for an attorney. Self-petitioning candidates should use these tools to prepare — then take the output to a licensed immigration attorney.
Not guaranteed to result in approval. Petition outcomes depend on the facts, the evidence, and USCIS adjudication.

Contributing

The knowledge base improves with every case. After a case outcome:

Add anonymized best practices to the relevant criteria/ or prongs/ file
Never commit client names, company names, or identifying details
Keep entries concise and actionable

Contact

For professional immigration guidance (EB-1, NIW, O-1), you can contact Neo Global.

License

MIT