I'm Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

Hi, my sympathies about the Brexit thing, I can see why you'd be looking around. I think Peter summed this up nicely. To elaborate a bit on the 10 criteria:

-It's not binary. The more high-quality evidence you provide, in more categories, the "bigger" you look, and the better your chances of success.

-It's not 100% guaranteed if you meet the minimum 3, because the adjudication is very subjective. Your aim is to create an overall impression of achievement, recognition, prominence, and impact on your field - and to do that within their 8 narrow, arbitrary evidence categories.

-While more categories generally are better, it will hurt the case to throw in low-quality evidence (i.e., employee-of-the-month awards, hyperlocal news stories) just to add another category. Basically bad evidence makes you look small, which is the opposite of what you want.

-You can start right away, compiling evidence of the cool work you're doing, plus its impact on your field and how it makes peoples' lives better. Get some media coverage. Enter some contests. Judge some contests. Write some articles.

HTH clarify a bit.

Yes, it sounds quite strong, especially with the media coverage. VC or other funding can be considered a "prize or award" if documented right. Other things you can do:

1. Continue seeking media coverage, the more prestigious the better.

2. Document the specific impacts your product has in making the world a better place. How has it made a dent in the universe? Factual evidence of specific, industry-wide impacts can really skyrocket your chances of success.

These impacts are hard for many applicants to explain and document, so if you can do it, it will really make your petition stand out.

3. Enter some competitions and win some awards (including, but not limited to, funding, admission to prestigious accelerators, etc.).

4. Judge some competitions or submissions: Hackathons, pitch competitions, applications for funding, peer review, anything in your industry.

5. Write and publish some articles, either on technical topics in your industry (better), or general-interest media articles and blog posts (good).

6. If you're making money, think about how to frame your compensation as higher than the norm in your industry. You have to prove, not only that you have high compensation, but that others similarly placed have lower compensation. There are a number of ways to present this, so it's good to start thinking about how to show a "pyramid."

HTH.

+1. Many denials come from throwing together a bunch of low-quality evidence that vaguely looks like it might meet the criteria. These cases also tend to be poorly organized, poorly presented, and lacking any narrative.

Adjudicators see these cases all day long. They aren't fooled, and they won't approve them.

You can really make your adjudicator's day - and secure a quick approval - with an organized, nicely presented, high-quality evidence package, that's tied together with a compelling narrative.

Hi, I took a look at your site and the NASA Space Apps site. You have some very impressive accomplishments. I agree with Peter that you are well on your way to an O-1.

The NASA award is definitely strong enough to build a case around, if you file in the next year or two, so that the evidence is not stale.

The Makers UPV website is very cool. With proper documentation it could be counted as an "original contribution of major significance." It would be good to start collecting specific examples of its impact on the field, how it's helped people, and what it has created, that was not there before.

In general, other student-level accomplishments aren't considered O-1 caliber. Phi Beta Kappa, academic awards, student papers, etc. are considered by USCIS to be at a preparatory or entry level. They are best omitted, as they will weaken your case and make you look small.

Instead, I would focus on your substantive accomplishments - things that you have made, and how they have helped people, or made an impact on the world.

Also consider seeking some media coverage for your stuff in tech publications or general-interest media.

Write some papers, or do some podcasts or videos, that showcase your work and show its practical applications.

BY FAR the biggest O-1 challenge faced by makers, engineers, and developers, is explaining what you did, and why it's cool, in language that a 7-year-old can grasp and understand right away.

When your O-1 application hits the adjudicator's desk, you will have 5 to 15 minutes to make your case. He doesn't have a clue about JS or Angular. It's very difficult to explain why your work is new and different and cutting-edge, when you have such a limited window to explain it. Yet that - plus your evidence - is THE key to O-1 success.

My best advice: Practice on your grandma. Or your artist friend. Or your GF. Explain it, and explain it, and explain it again. Just bore the crap out of them, until they finally say, OH, I get it! That's so cool!

TL;DR, but hope you can use this in the future. Best of luck.

O-1s are great in that way. They reward creativity and niche occupations for sure. Well-documented, totally legit O-1 applications have been approved for burlesque dancers, motocross mechanics, and water sommeliers (yes apparently that is a real thing).