For immigration attorneys
AI that reasons from the law.
The judgment stays yours.
Start with applicants who have already explored their case. Partner with us on evaluation review and help shape what comes next, from focused advice to full representation.
Dr. Ananya Mehta
EB-2 NIW · Computational biology
Case readiness
Shared evaluation
Evaluation summary
Three prongs assessed
Evidence gaps
Items needing support
Assessment context
Assumptions to verify
Questions for counsel
2 open
AI reasoned from the standard. Your firm applies the judgment.
Review evaluationIllustrative review workflow. Current professional access is limited to an evaluation explicitly shared by its applicant.
Prepared applicants. A clearer starting point.
Applicants use Papers to evaluate their options and prepare an NIW case. A licensed attorney can assess the facts, explain the risks, and advise on filing. Software does not replace that judgment.
Your engagement, your terms
Your practice sets its engagement terms and manages the client relationship. Evaluation access does not establish representation.
Judgment stays with counsel
AI can evaluate, organize, and draft. The legal conclusions and filing strategy stay with your attorneys.
Sharing is consent-based
Applicants choose whether to share an evaluation and can revoke access. Their evidence files remain private.
Why our AI
We teach the AI how to think, not what to copy.
Papers evaluates the record against published criteria and explains where support is missing. The method is available for inspection, and the output still needs human review.
Checks the published criteria
Issue by issue against the controlling authority (the statute, the regulations, the agency's own policy, and the decisions that bind it), not paragraph by paragraph against a template.
Identifies evidence gaps
Tests the record against the burden of proof and asks what a neutral adjudicator would conclude. Adjudicator-aware, not advocate-only.
Makes assumptions visible
Built to learn how the law is actually applied, then tag every claim Documented, Inferred, or Unsupported.
Template-based drafting
Trained on sample filings
Prompted to match a style
Retrieval over the statutes and rules
Teaches the AI what to do. The output looks right.
Papers, engineered for legal reasoning
Reason from the controlling authority, issue by issue
Think like the attorney building the case
Think like the adjudicator testing the record
Tag every claim: Documented, Inferred, or Unsupported
Makes the reasoning available for review. Verify the evidence and conclusions.
Don't take our word for it. Read the reasoning.
Our evaluation method is open source. Inspect exactly how the AI reasons, or have your own attorneys and paralegals critique it.
Where judgment lives
Bring judgment to the questions AI leaves open.
A professional can question assumptions, verify evidence, and advise on the law. Applicants should review AI output and seek counsel when they need legal advice or representation.
AI preparation
Evaluation review requires separate applicant consent
Attorney judgment
AI prepares. Qualified counsel provides legal advice.
A first conversation
Start the conversation with an evaluation.
An applicant can use a Papers evaluation to identify questions for counsel. Sharing that evaluation is a separate choice; completing one does not send a lead or a case to a practice.
Evaluation access does not establish representation or transfer the applicant’s evidence files. The practice handles its own conflicts, engagement terms, and legal advice.
What your firm receives
Review the shared evaluation.
An approved professional receives access only to the evaluation the applicant selected. Evidence editing, petition review, and a shared case workspace are not included in this access.
Evaluation summary
Review the evaluation the applicant has chosen to share, including the evidence gaps and assumptions it identifies.
Assessment and supporting context
Specific permission
Access to an evaluation does not grant access to the applicant's entire case or documents. The applicant can revoke it.
Scoped, revocable access
Two ways to partner
Review today. Help shape what comes next.
Contact Papers about authorized evaluation review. The planned lawyer panel will provide a separate way for applicants to contact a practice; it is not yet publicly available.
Evaluation review
Review with the applicant's permission
Approved professionals can review an evaluation when the applicant explicitly grants access. Access is scoped and revocable.
Planned
Assist by Attorney
A curated lawyer panel and consultation requests are planned. Contact us about participating. Public access is not yet available.
Confidentiality & trust
Your client's data stays your client's data.
Papers uses enterprise AI services and does not use client data to train models. Access to an evaluation requires the applicant’s explicit permission. Attorneys should assess confidentiality and privilege for their own matters.
Not the consumer tools
Papers runs on enterprise AI under contract, not the public apps whose terms permit training on inputs and disclosure to third parties.
Never used to train a model
Client information, and the work product built from it, is processed under enterprise data terms, not used to improve any model, and held inside Papers' own cloud.
Applicant-controlled access
The applicant owns the case record and chooses what to share. Evaluation access is separate from a consultation request and can be revoked.
And the lines we don't cross
Papers is not a law firm and does not advise on privilege; your firm applies its own professional judgment. Data-processing terms and security details are available on request.
Become a partner
Partner with Papers.
Contact us about authorized evaluation review and the planned Assist by Attorney service.
