Built for immigration lawyers

Standardize the evidence pass before attorney review.

Run every EB-1A, O-1A, and EB-2 NIW intake through the same claim, source, verifier, gap, and counsel-question map. One $129 local workspace turns scattered inputs into a cleaner first-pass brief without uploading client data or replacing your legal judgment.

Download it immediately. Use it on one matter, then keep it for every matter inside the purchasing practice.

A repeatable assessment, before drafting starts

Use the same five-part evidence row across talent and NIW intakes. Your team sees what the client claims, what proves the fact, who verifies it, what remains missing, and which question belongs to counsel.

1. Structured intake

Collect the field, proposed work, timeline, prior filings, evidence inventory, and the client's requested outcome without treating self-reported achievements as proof.

2. Evidence control sheet

Separate each claim from its artifact and independent verifier. Mark missing dates, scope, adoption, results, source locators, and attorney questions.

3. Next-step brief

Export an internal review memo and a client-facing evidence request. Your legal assessment stays separate from the organizational worksheet.

Runs in a local browser

No new system for your firm to adopt.

Open one HTML file, choose the path, complete the evidence rows, and export a Markdown brief or print a PDF. The workspace makes no network requests and stores nothing after the tab closes.

  • Use matter numbers or initials
  • Works without a login
  • No client portal or case-management migration
  • Editable templates for the firm's own process
PROFILE ASSESSMENT
Client claimLed fraud-model deploymentCandidate statement
ArtifactDeployment reportDocumented
Independent verifierPartner case studyNeeds adoption scope
Next requestRedacted outcome metricsClient owns
Vetted synthetic example

See the standard before you buy.

A useful first-pass review should make every assertion traceable, show where corroboration is weak, and leave the legal judgment with counsel.

Review objective

Test whether the record supports the narrow factual claim that the beneficiary led deployment of an AI triage system across 12 clinics, and identify what counsel would still need before assigning legal significance.

Fictional O-1A / EB-1A evidence-organization example. Not legal advice, an eligibility analysis, or a legal conclusion.
Claim under reviewThe beneficiary led deployment across 12 clinics and the system reduced triage time by 28%.
E-01 · employer letterEmployer-controlled

Locator: 2026-05-02, page 2, paragraph 3. Attributes technical leadership and says “12 clinics,” but gives no clinic names or measurement method.

E-02 · dashboard exportEmployer-controlled

Locator: Q3 2025, page 1, rows 8-19. Lists 12 site codes and a 28% change, but omits the baseline window, denominator, exclusions, and system owner.

E-03 · medical director letterThird-party · one site

Locator: 2025-10-14, page 1, paragraphs 2-4. Confirms use at one clinic and describes workflow improvement without quantifying 28%.

Support strength · Partially supportedLeadership and one-site use have direct support. Twelve-site external adoption and the 28% causal claim do not yet have independent support.
Named evidence gapObtain named-site confirmation, the metric definition and baseline, the beneficiary's specific decision rights, and a defensible link to the reported change.
Contradiction and timeline checkE-01 says production began May 2024; E-02 starts October 2024. Reconcile the five-month gap and any pilot-versus-production distinction.
Questions reserved for counsel
  1. Which path or criterion, if any, is this factual row being evaluated against?
  2. What degree of outside adoption or independent corroboration is material to counsel's analysis?
  3. Is the 28% metric useful without a documented baseline and attribution method, or should it be framed more narrowly?
  4. What facts would distinguish ordinary team participation from the beneficiary's claimed leadership?

Counsel decides the legal relevance. The product output stops at source traceability, support strength, missing facts, and a focused question queue.

Designed for the intake gap, not the whole practice

Use it when

You run recurring EB-1A, O-1A, or NIW profile reviews and want a consistent evidence map before deciding case fit, legal path, or next information requests.

Use it with

Your current CRM, forms system, document store, consultation process, and legal judgment. The files require no integration.

Skip it when

You need form filling, client portals, petition drafting, e-filing, deadline management, or a firm-wide case-management platform.

A small, one-time tool in a subscription-heavy market

OptionPrimary jobBuying motionBest fit
ChatEB1 Lawyer KitPre-consult credential and evidence organization$129 onceSolo and boutique practices that want a lightweight intake layer
Immigration case-management suitesForms, portals, CRM, tracking, billing, and workflowsRecurring per-seat subscriptionFirms replacing or consolidating core practice software
AI petition platformsDrafting, packet assembly, research, and case preparationRecurring per-seat subscriptionFirms ready to adopt a drafting and production system
Custom firm softwareEncode a firm's proprietary method and integrationsCustom build and ongoing supportHigher-volume firms with a stable internal process

What you receive

  • Standalone profile-assessment workspace
  • Pre-consult client questionnaire
  • Spreadsheet-ready evidence control sheet
  • Internal attorney assessment memo
  • Client next-step brief
  • Attorney-controlled redaction-safe prompt pack
  • Synthetic worked example and license

Questions lawyers should ask

Does ChatEB1 assess legal eligibility?

No. The kit organizes facts, evidence, independent verification, missing information, and questions. A licensed attorney decides eligibility, strategy, filing posture, deadlines, and the legal use of each item.

What is the purchase actually buying?

A reusable set of local files for intake and evidence organization. ChatEB1 does not sell credentials, attorney access, recommendation placement, or a promised case outcome.

Does client information go to ChatEB1?

No. The standalone workspace makes no network requests and stores nothing after the browser tab closes. Your firm remains responsible for confidentiality, approved technology use, retention, and access controls.

Can staff or paralegals use it?

Yes, inside the purchasing practice. Staff can collect and organize facts. The attorney should review the brief and make every legal decision.

Is this a subscription?

No. The kit is a one-time digital purchase. It does not include a hosted client portal, storage, case management, drafting service, or ongoing legal updates.

Can I adapt the templates?

Yes, for internal use inside one law practice. The license does not allow resale or publication as a competing template product.

What happens after checkout?

Gumroad delivers the downloadable kit. Open START-HERE, then run the local workspace from your computer.

Lawyer Profile Assessment Kit$129 one-time purchase
Buy the $129 kit