Buyer guide
An evergreen buyer checklist for immigration law firms evaluating drafting, intake, document review, workflow, and attorney-control capabilities.
For current-year market considerations, read the separate 2026 immigration AI evaluation guide.
Book a workflow reviewChoose immigration AI software by testing the full path from intake through attorney review. Compare supported case types, document collection, missing-item follow-up, forms, letters, evidence traceability, integrations, government-workflow depth, security, pricing, and the work your team still has to complete manually.
Partners, operations leaders, and immigration teams comparing AI drafting tools, document automation, CRM add-ons, and workflow platforms.
| Criterion | What to verify |
|---|---|
| Supported case types | Real workflows for your highest-volume matters, not a generic claim. |
| Intake | Structured client and employer data enters the case once. |
| Document collection | Requests map to the matter and evidence requirements. |
| Missing-item follow-up | Gaps have an owner, status, and supported follow-up path. |
| Source traceability | Reviewers can connect output back to the matter source. |
| Forms and letters | Your templates, formats, and approved language are supported. |
| Evidence | Documents are classified, mapped, and organized for review. |
| Integrations | Inputs and approved outputs move through your system of record. |
| DOL/USCIS depth | The vendor identifies exactly which preparation steps are supported. |
| Attorney controls | Legal decisions and final filing stay with qualified reviewers. |
| Security and deployment | Access, encryption, retention, and environment options fit firm policy. |
| Pricing model | Compare total staff work remaining, not only the seat price. |
| Implementation burden | Pilot scope, template setup, integration work, and owners are explicit. |
When evaluating Infinity, trace one representative matter through document collection, gap follow-up, extraction, forms, firm-template letters, evidence organization, consistency checks, supported government steps, and CMS updates.
The legal team should see what was prepared, what remains unresolved, and what requires judgment before any final filing decision.
Workflow fit and attorney control. The tool should improve real case work, not just generate text.
Usually no. Most firms should keep the system of record stable and add automation where intake, evidence, drafting, or review creates bottlenecks.
A product that promises to replace legal judgment instead of preparing clearer work for attorney review.