Although the testimonial letters offer praise of the petitioners work and attribute success and quality to the petitioner's work, But???
Have you seen this statement in any of AAO decision, then please read this article
Merit evaluation is often overlooked, yet it is one of the most valuable steps in an immigration journey. You need a clear assessment of your profile measured against USCIS policy or reviewed by a reputable attorney. A structured legal merit evaluation becomes a long term asset because it guides every decision, shapes your evidence strategy, and stays relevant until the day your petition is approved.
A strong merit evaluation score helps predict where an RFE is likely because it highlights the exact parts of a profile that don’t meet the legal standard. Many RFEs come from gaps in evidence, especially in criteria like leading or critical role. USCIS looks for proof that the candidate’s work was not just important, but uniquely important compared to peers.
Merely performing expected duties, even if they are noteworthy, does not satisfy the leading or critical role requirement. Testimonial letters often fall short because they repeat praise, describe general responsibilities, or talk about team accomplishments. If a letter doesn’t show how the applicant was different from others in the same role, USCIS will issue an RFE.
A testimonial letter is not a letter of admiration. It is a profile witness statement. It should explain how the applicant worked, why their contribution mattered, and what would have happened if they were not involved.
Writing an effective testimonial letter is not an AI feature. It is a real skill. A strong letter doesn’t exist to praise you. It exists to explain your importance. There are thousands of skilled and competent professionals in the United States. What matters is how you stand out at the top of your field.
I’ve seen many cases where USCIS didn’t question the petition itself. The issue was the missing details. When the letter fails to show why you were irreplaceable, what impact only you could create, or how your work changed the outcome, it weakens the entire petition.
This is why crafting testimonial letters is a critical skill. It requires clarity, evidence, and precise storytelling that shows your distinction, not just your competence.
For example, if the candidate handled a production release, the letter shouldn’t simply say the release went well. Instead, it should highlight selective skills:
The candidate created a detailed pre-release plan
They identified risks in advance
They set up multiple checkpoints for safe rollback
Their planning reduced the chance of a failed release
Only a small percentage of engineers in the company have this level of risk-mitigation ability
This presents the candidate as someone whose actions changed the outcome. That is the essence of a critical role.
Supporting evidence should include risk-mitigation documents, execution emails, production schedules, presentations, and internal approvals. When these artifacts are scored through merit evaluation, the system can flag whether the critical-role standard is met or whether it will trigger an RFE.
That is the power of legal merit evaluation. It turns subjective statements into measurable evidence strength, exposes vulnerabilities before filing, and increases clarity for both the applicant and the attorney.