// Drafts EB-2 NIW self-petition support letters using the Dhanasar three-prong framework. First-person narrative with evidence enrichment — every claim backed by a source. Produces a single consolidated petition package.
| name | niw-petition-narrative |
| description | Drafts EB-2 NIW self-petition support letters using the Dhanasar three-prong framework. First-person narrative with evidence enrichment — every claim backed by a source. Produces a single consolidated petition package. |
You draft the self-petition support letter for an EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW). This letter accompanies Form I-140 and argues why the beneficiary's proposed endeavor is in the national interest, making it beneficial to waive the job offer and labor certification requirements.
Key difference from O-1A/EB-1A: The NIW letter is written in FIRST PERSON ("I" not "the Beneficiary") and is forward-looking — it focuses on what the beneficiary WILL DO, not just what they have done.
Cardinal rule: Every factual claim must be backed by a document exhibit or verified web source. Zero unverified claims.
Before drafting, read these files from knowledge/:
overview-niw.md — the Dhanasar framework, letter structure, field-specific guidanceprongs/01-substantial-merit.md — how to argue national importance with government dataprongs/02-well-positioned.md — how to show track record (field-specific evidence hierarchies)prongs/03-national-interest-balance.md — how to argue the waiverevidence-hierarchy.md — universal evidence weighting (Tier 1-4)argument-patterns.md — reusable argument structuresuscis-policy-alerts.md — key policy citations (Dhanasar, PA-2022-03 if equity is relevant)These files contain distilled best practices from real cases. Follow them.
knowledge/prongs/Consumes the document index from document-summary-arrangement. If case-strength-assessor was run first, use its prong ratings and evidence-gap list to focus the national-importance and well-positioned sections — final strategy remains with the attorney.
If publication-citation-table output exists, use the C3 side list vs C5-tagged rows to keep press coverage separate from authorship, and the TSV/lead works to order the track-record section — still apply the cardinal sourcing rule to every sentence in the letter.
| Prong | Question | Evidence Available? |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Substantial Merit & National Importance | What U.S. problem does the endeavor address? | |
| 2. Well Positioned | What track record proves the beneficiary can advance this? | |
| 3. Balance | Why should the job offer requirement be waived? |
For the national problem identified in Phase 1, web-search for:
For every fact found, record: exact number, source URL, retrieval date, exact quote.
For every achievement, metric, and claim from the document index:
Build the source registry (same format as o1-petition-narrative).
Dear Immigration Officer,
I am writing to support my petition to classify myself as a member of the
professions sustaining exceptional abilities and request a national interest
waiver of the job offer requirement. I intend to reside and work permanently
in the United States. In my role as [title], I plan to continue my pivotal
work at [Company], [one-sentence description of what the company does].
My work focuses on [specific focus of the endeavor].
Adapt to the field:
Researchers: Research program, key findings, publications, citations, grants, lab/team Physicians: Practice setting, patient population, clinical specialties, outcomes data Engineers: Projects, technical contributions, patents, systems built or maintained Entrepreneurs: Company, products/services, traction (users, revenue, funding), awards, media Educators: Programs developed, curricula created, institutions served, student outcomes
For each major contribution, describe:
Must be SPECIFIC and CREDIBLE:
Researchers: "Continue Phase II clinical trial of [compound] under NIH grant #[X], targeting publication in [journal] by [year]" Physicians: "Expand telemedicine program to 3 additional HPSA-designated counties, increasing patient access by [X]%" Engineers: "Lead structural analysis for the $[X]M [project name], implementing [specific methodology]" Entrepreneurs: "Launch [feature] integrating [technology] to serve [user segment], targeting [metric] by [date]" Educators: "Develop [curriculum] for adoption by [N] school districts in [region]"
Include partnership plans, funding strategy, and expansion goals where applicable.
This is the core of the NIW argument. Structure:
The U.S. problem — cite 3-5 government statistics on the problem's scope
How the endeavor addresses the problem
Alignment with national priorities
Connection to AI and national competitiveness (for tech petitions)
Summarize the beneficiary's track record across all evidence categories:
This section mirrors the O-1A/EB-1A totality argument — it shows the beneficiary is well positioned (Prong 2) by aggregating all evidence.
In conclusion, [summary of the three prongs]. I am confident that granting
me permanent residency will enable me to continue making significant
advancements in [field], benefiting [specific populations] and supporting
[national goals]. Therefore, I respectfully request that my petition for
a national interest waiver and permanent residency be approved.
Sincerely,
__________
[Beneficiary Name]
Save everything as workspace/<matter-name>/petition/niw_petition_package.md:
# EB-2 NIW Petition Package — [Beneficiary Name]
# DRAFT — For Attorney Review
# Generated: [Date]
---
## PART 1: SUPPORT LETTER
[Full letter text]
---
## PART 2: SOURCE REGISTRY
[Every fact with source: document exhibit or web URL with exact quote]
---
## PART 3: WEB SOURCES — ATTORNEY ACTION REQUIRED
[URLs to print/screenshot for filing — especially government statistics]
---
## PART 4: EVIDENCE GAPS & FLAGS
[Missing evidence, unverified claims, suggested additional evidence]
### Prong Assessment
| Prong | Strength | Notes |
|-------|----------|-------|
| 1. Substantial Merit & National Importance | | |
| 2. Well Positioned | | |
| 3. Balance | | |
Optional pre-draft skill. Reads the document index from document-summary-arrangement and produces a frank, evidence-based assessment of which O-1A/EB-1A criteria or NIW Dhanasar prongs are strong, moderate, weak, or unsupported. Use only when the team wants this pass before narrative drafting — not a required step.
Reads source legal documents (PDFs, images, scans via OCR), triages by importance, summarizes each document, classifies by type, and produces a structured index with metadata — the foundational skill for all legal document work.
Drafts EB-1A (extraordinary ability green card) petition support letters. Stricter than O-1A — requires sustained acclaim, intent to continue work, and substantial U.S. benefit. Same 8 criteria plus commercial success and display of work.
Drafts expert/reference/recommendation letters for immigration petitions. Assigns criteria to experts based on their credentials, ensures each letter says something different, and produces ready-to-customize drafts the expert can sign.
Researches authoritative U.S. government sources, national plans, and policy initiatives to build the national importance argument for an EB-2 NIW petition. Compiles a quotable source document matched to the petitioner's background.
Drafts the O-1A/O-1B petition support letter from a document index. Follows standard immigration firm format with evidence enrichment — every factual claim must be backed by a document exhibit or a verified web source. Zero unverified claims allowed.