For thousands of highly skilled immigrants, securing an O-1 visa or an EB-1A green card is often viewed as recognition of years of hard work, innovation, and professional achievement. But according to Indian American entrepreneur Nikin Tharan, even applicants with exceptional credentials can find themselves facing rejection if they fail to present their case effectively.
Tharan, a serial entrepreneur and cofounder of Openventure, recently shared a candid assessment on LinkedIn of what he believes are the most common mistakes made by applicants pursuing O-1 and EB-1A immigration pathways in 2026.
“You can be objectively extraordinary and still get denied an O-1 or EB-1A,” Tharan wrote. “Why? Because the petition is a case you build and most people build it wrong.”
His comments have resonated with immigrant founders, researchers, executives, and professionals navigating one of the most competitive areas of the U.S. immigration system.
Tharan’s perspective comes from personal experience. He received an O-1A visa in 2020 and an EB-1A green card in 2022, achievements that followed years of building his professional profile and documenting his accomplishments.
READ: Green Card applicants will not be required to leave US, DHS says (May 30, 2026)
His immigration journey was later featured in the Amazon bestseller “Unshackled.” Today, he helps high-skilled immigrants navigate university admissions, housing, career opportunities, and visa pathways including O-1, NIW, EB-1A, and EB-5.
At the heart of Tharan’s message is a warning against what he calls “checklist thinking.” Many applicants focus heavily on satisfying the minimum eligibility requirements, assuming that meeting three qualifying criteria automatically translates into approval.
According to him, immigration officers are not simply counting boxes checked on a form. Instead, they are evaluating whether the overall case convincingly demonstrates extraordinary ability and sustained excellence.
Another mistake he frequently sees is confusing activity with impact. Many accomplished professionals submit lengthy resumes packed with speaking engagements, publications, leadership positions, and projects. While those achievements can be important, Tharan argues that officers are ultimately looking for evidence of measurable influence.
“Busy ≠ impact,” he wrote, emphasizing that applicants should demonstrate how their work changed industries, reached large audiences, generated revenue, drove innovation, or produced meaningful results.
The quality of supporting evidence also plays a critical role.
Tharan cautioned applicants against relying on paid media placements, self-promotional articles, or vanity awards that may appear manufactured. Immigration officers, he suggested, are increasingly focused on authentic third-party recognition and independent validation rather than promotional materials designed solely to strengthen a petition.
Equally important is crafting a clear narrative. Many applicants present extensive evidence but fail to connect it into a compelling story. Tharan noted that adjudicators reviewing dozens of cases should be able to quickly understand who the applicant is, what they have accomplished, and why their work matters.
READ: H-1B workers, temporary visa holders must apply for Green Cards from outside US (
A fragmented application, even one filled with impressive credentials, can weaken an otherwise strong case.
Recommendation letters remain another common area where applicants fall short.
According to Tharan, generic letters that merely praise an applicant’s skills often carry limited weight. Strong letters should instead provide concrete examples of influence, explain why the applicant’s contributions matter, and demonstrate how their work stands apart from peers in the field.
He also highlighted a frequently overlooked aspect of extraordinary ability petitions: explaining why the applicant’s work benefits the United States.
While past achievements are important, officers may also want to understand how those accomplishments translate into future contributions. Applicants who fail to establish this connection may leave important questions unanswered.
Several of Tharan’s observations focused on the importance of context.
Professional titles alone may not tell the full story. Being a founder, executive, researcher, or director can sound impressive, but applicants should also explain the scale of their responsibilities by providing details such as team size, budget authority, user growth, market impact, patents, or revenue figures.
Another issue is relying too heavily on achievements from years ago.
According to Tharan, immigration officers want to see evidence that extraordinary ability remains current and sustained. Awards or accomplishments from the distant past may be less persuasive if they are not supported by more recent evidence of continued success.
READ: EB-1 visa advance ‘temporary’ and ‘not long-lasting’, driven by adjudication pause, says immigration attorney (December 24, 2025)
He further advised applicants to avoid depending solely on internal documentation from employers or organizations. Independent media coverage, third-party testimonials, industry recognition, public metrics, and external validation can significantly strengthen credibility.
For applicants who receive a Request for Evidence (RFE), Tharan offered particularly strong advice.
Many view an RFE as a routine step in the process, but he argues it often signals that an adjudicator remains unconvinced by parts of the petition. Rather than submitting excessive documentation in hopes of overwhelming reviewers, applicants should directly address the specific concerns raised.
He also pointed to the growing importance of maintaining a consistent public profile.
In today’s digital environment, immigration officers can review websites, LinkedIn profiles, media mentions, publications, and other publicly available information. Discrepancies between a petition and an applicant’s public presence may raise questions about credibility.
Finally, Tharan warned against waiting until the last minute to prepare a case.
Building a successful O-1 or EB-1A petition often requires months, and in some cases years, of gathering evidence, developing a public profile, securing media coverage, obtaining recommendation letters, and documenting professional impact.
“Strong cases are rarely built in panic,” he wrote.