CaseBlink vs Visalaw AI: how they compare in 2026

CaseBlink is AI case preparation for US immigration attorneys. Its models tag, label and extract data from client documents and check them for missing context, duplicates and inconsistencies. They search AAO and BIA decisions, case law and the USCIS Policy Manual, fill USCIS forms from intake and uploaded documents, and draft support letters, reference letters and briefs in the firm's voice. They read an RFE notice to map evidence to each request and draft the response. The Autopilot agent runs that sequence from upload to a tabbed filing packet in one pass. The Core plan at $200 per seat is where the AI lives. The Lite plan at $100 covers categorization, exhibit lists and one click PDF export, which are largely workflow, and the Pro plan in beta adds case management around the AI. For a firm buying Core or above, removing the models leaves very little.

Research, drafting, document analysis, translation and summarization are model work, and the plans are priced around them. In version 2.1, Research Agent decides what kind of question it faces, picks the sources, reads them and writes the answer, and drafting turns case facts into petitions and briefs. Around the models sit projects organized by matter, team permissions and audit trails, electronic signature, certified translation and a curated immigration library, which a connector gives Claude read only access to. Without the models, the curated library and the case workspace would remain.

CaseBlink says every output cites directly to the client's uploaded case documents and its research, so the attorney can check each statement at its source. It names what the research draws on: AAO and BIA decisions, case law, the USCIS Policy Manual and government resources. Its quality checker reviews uploaded evidence for missing context and inconsistencies before drafting. No number is published: no citation accuracy rate, no rate of unsupported statements, no test set and no approval outcome. The Service Agreement lists ways AI output can go wrong, including errors, misleading content and weak reasoning on complex tasks, and disclaims any warranty of the accuracy of output.

Version 2.1 verifies citations against the source text before an answer reaches the user, and a citation opens beside the answer at the page with the supporting passage highlighted. Research Agent reads about five sources on a typical question and goes to the open web only when the question calls for it. Users choose which collections are in scope, from United States immigration law and case law to Canadian immigration law, live government sites and unpublished BIA decisions. The library spans agency materials, BIA and AAO decisions, AILA publications and more than 10 million cases from over 2,000 courts. The connector for Claude ranks results by authority, matches cited authorities against the library catalog and draws case law from CourtListener. No accuracy rate or evaluation of answers is published, and the claim of accuracy every time rests on no measurement.

Autopilot organizes documents, reviews evidence, conducts research, writes drafts and assembles the filing packet in one click, then hands the attorney a complete packet to review before anything is filed; CaseBlink does not file on its own. Each statement in a draft cites to the uploaded evidence or research behind it, which gives the reviewing attorney a way to check the work line by line. The page for individual applicants says an expert attorney prepares the case using CaseBlink under their supervision. No control inside the automated run is published: no confidence signal on a weak draft, no point where Autopilot stops for a decision, and no route for flagging an error back to the vendor. The Service Agreement says CaseBlink may review output before it is returned but does not promise to, and places the risk of relying on output with the customer.

The Platform Agreement makes the customer responsible for evaluating output, and the about page says the technology supports professional judgment rather than replacing it. Paralegals and assistants work under a supervising attorney's account with audit trails. Research Agent shows each step as it works, lets the user expand finished steps or stop early with Answer Now, and proposes follow up questions that send nothing until the user does. Drafts are generated for editing and AI revision in the platform, and Kuck Baxter describes using them for early drafting while senior attorneys handle judgment, revision and client strategy. No limit is published on what a draft may be used for, and no review step is required before a petition leaves the platform.

Logos of firms including Dorsey & Whitney, Dickinson Wright, Fakhoury Global Immigration, Clark Lau and Cline Williams appear on CaseBlink's site, which runs a testimonials page with named attorneys. Its page for individual applicants refers to partner firms that review cases prepared on the platform. It reports more than 100 firms, 1,000 users and 3,000 cases prepared, up from more than 50 firms and 1,000 cases in March 2025, and announced a $2 million funding round on its blog. No outcome evidence is published: the claim of filing five times faster has no method or sample behind it, and no approval rates, RFE rates or time per petition are reported for any named firm.

Customer stories come from Charles Kuck of Kuck Baxter Immigration, Cyrus Mehta of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners and Ken Robinson, a solo business immigration lawyer who says the platform saves him four to six hours a week. Kuck Baxter uses it for early drafting and Mehta as a research assistant during live client consultations. The pricing page claims more than ten hours saved per case and $60,000 a year, assuming ten drafts a month. The 2.1 release reports typical research answers in 15 to 30 seconds against about 90 seconds in 2.0, from about 180 questions run in September 2026. The customer figures are self reported and undated, with no method.

The Service Agreement (effective 15 July 2026) says third party AI tools acting for CaseBlink retain no customer data and that output generated from customer data is itself customer data. Section 5 carries mutual confidentiality obligations, including notice before any compelled disclosure, and the data processing agreement has customer personal data deleted within 90 days of termination. The security page adds isolated tenant environments, data purged immediately after each model operation, no model training on client content, and a zero data retention agreement with OpenAI available on request. Section 1.4 licenses CaseBlink to copy, create derivative works of and otherwise use customer data to improve and develop its products and to create anonymized aggregated data, on a platform holding asylum declarations and medical evidence. Neither the agreement nor the security page addresses attorney client privilege or work product.

Section 4.3 of the Platform Agreement bars Visalaw and its third party model providers from training any AI model on customer data or content. Confidential information stays protected for the term and ten years after it ends. The Security Addendum scopes every record to an organization identifier and isolates each firm's embeddings in the shared vector index, and model providers may not keep or share content after a call. The Data Processing Addendum keeps customer data, matter level content included, in the customer's own tenant environment without pooling it with others. The connector for Claude writes none of the questions asked through it to its logs and trains nothing. Visalaw's post on the Heppner ruling sets out how privilege and work product apply to AI use and how firms can protect them.

Section 6.2 of the Service Agreement says that material provided by CaseBlink or its representatives is for general information, is not legal advice and creates no attorney client relationship, and the website terms repeat it; the agreement describes the service as a tool for legal professionals and puts responsibility for reviewing output on the customer. Section 6.3 lists the limits of AI output in plain terms. The product is sold to immigration attorneys, paralegals and corporate immigration teams, and every draft is framed as work the attorney reviews before filing. The exception is the page for individual applicants, which takes a foreign national's intake form and documents, structures them into a case file for partner firms to assess, and matches the applicant with a vetted partner firm. It says the attorney prepares the case under their supervision, but carries no not legal advice statement of its own and does not say whether partner firms pay for the introduction.

The Platform Agreement calls the service a research and drafting tool whose output is not legal advice and may contain errors. The platform FAQ says it is designed for immigration attorneys and professionals who are AILA members, and that paralegals and assistants use it only under a supervising attorney's account with audit trails. No jurisdiction limit is stated, although research now includes a Canadian immigration law collection. The same FAQ says the product ensures ethical compliance and accuracy every time, which only the lawyer using it can ensure.

Section 6.3 of the Service Agreement lists the ways AI output can fail, including factual errors, a lack of empathy, bias carried over from training data and weak reasoning on tasks that need judgment. It makes the customer responsible for any bias audits, notices or consents that apply where AI processes personal data. What sits behind that on CaseBlink's side is not described. No one is named as accountable for the drafting and research models, and nothing says how a change to prompts, templates or the underlying model is tested before firms see it. No evaluation is published of how drafts and RFE responses perform across visa categories, nationalities or the languages of source documents. The security page's 52 controls cover information security, not model behavior, on a product whose drafts argue that a person qualifies for a visa.

Visalaw's about page sets out principles, including that technology should support professional judgment rather than replace it. The security page lists ISO/IEC 42001 as in progress, and the Security Addendum covers model provider security, from encrypted transfer to bans on training and retention. Under the Data Processing Addendum, both parties will cooperate on changes if new AI regulation requires them. Version 2.1 came with early results from about 180 research questions run by the team and a pilot group in September 2026, measuring speed and the number of sources read rather than accuracy. No one is named as accountable for model quality, and nothing is published on testing before a model or prompt change, or on uneven output across case types, languages or applicants' nationalities.

The Service Agreement (effective 15 July 2026) binds the third party AI tools acting for CaseBlink to retain no customer data, and the security page says data is purged immediately after each model operation. The data processing agreement has customer personal data deleted within 90 days of termination, commits CaseBlink to remediate a personal data breach promptly and notify the firm without undue delay with assistance on its own notices, lists its subprocessors, Google LLC, OpenAI OpCo LLC and Slack Technologies LLC, with 15 days' notice before any new one gains access and a right to object, and grants audit rights that a current SOC 2 Type 2 report can satisfy. The security page adds AES 256 encryption at rest and in transit, isolated tenants, single sign on, role based access, audit logs for sensitive operations, continuous threat monitoring and disaster recovery backups. The breach clause sets no fixed hour window.

The Security Addendum commits Visalaw to AES 256 encryption at rest and TLS 1.2 or higher in transit, least privilege access with multifactor authentication, and annual third party penetration tests. Critical vulnerabilities are fixed within 30 days and high ones within 60, and staff with access to customer data are screened. A security incident is reported without undue delay and within 24 hours of detection, and an independent forensic assessor investigates at Visalaw's expense. After termination, customer data and content are returned or deleted at the customer's election, with certification of deletion on request. New subprocessors come with at least 60 days' notice and a right to object, but the subprocessor list itself sits in a trust portal that opens after an access request. The connector for Claude logs only the tool name, user and organization for each call, never the query, and deletes those logs after 30 days.

Section 7 of the Service Agreement caps CaseBlink's total liability at the fees paid in the twelve months before the claim, cumulative rather than per incident. It raises the cap to twice that amount for breaches of the data security terms or confidentiality involving customer data. Section 8 has CaseBlink indemnify the firm against third party claims that the service infringes intellectual property. Output is carved out of all of this. The agreement disclaims any warranty of the accuracy or authenticity of output and any liability for actions taken based on it, and has the customer indemnify CaseBlink for claims arising from its use of output. A petition denied because a drafted brief misstated evidence or cited a decision wrongly would fall on the firm.

The Platform Agreement of 17 March 2026 has Visalaw defend and indemnify customers against third party claims that the service infringes intellectual property or arises from Visalaw's violation of law. The customer in turn indemnifies Visalaw for claims arising from customer data or the use of any content, which includes output. General liability is capped at the fees paid in the prior twelve months, with a separate cap of twice annual fees for security incidents involving customer data. Visalaw carries commercial general, technology errors and omissions and cyber liability insurance, with certificates on request and no amounts stated. The service is provided as is, and the agreement says output is generated by AI, may contain errors and is not legal advice.

Drafts leave CaseBlink as Word files and filing packets as tabbed PDF. It supports single sign on through SAML 2.0 and OIDC with Okta, Azure AD and Google Workspace, including central provisioning and deprovisioning, and the Service Agreement refers to API access. Its answer to case management is to build its own. The Pro plan, in beta at $300 per seat, adds client intake, profiles, a data repository, calendars and dependents tracking inside CaseBlink, and Enterprise offers custom integrations and a white label client portal. No connection is named to the immigration case management systems firms already use, such as INSZoom, Docketwise, eImmigration, LawLogix or Imagility, or to document management systems, and the API is not documented. A firm keeping its existing case system would move documents in and drafts out by hand.

Visalaw's integration partners are the eImmigration case management system by Cerenade, Clio and Docketwise, with Candle AI for email, MotaWord for translation and Google Drive, OneDrive and Dropbox for files. It has also announced an integration with Mitratech INSZoom, and API access goes to selected customers and partners on request. The connector for Claude has a public README, last updated in September 2026, giving the server address, the transport, OAuth 2.1 with PKCE, a single read only scope and tokens that expire after 90 days. Its seven tools cover the library by topic, INA and CFR citations, case law, full documents and the firm's saved prompts, limited to what the user's organization can already see. What the practice system integrations exchange, and in which direction, is not documented.

Google Cloud Platform hosts the service in isolated tenant environments, with encryption at rest and in transit, continuous monitoring and replicated disaster recovery backups, as CaseBlink's security page describes. The data processing agreement's subprocessor schedule places every listed processor, Google, OpenAI and Slack, in the United States, so a firm on a standard plan knows its data is processed in the US. The Enterprise plan, for 15 or more users, adds private hosting, a white label portal and data residency options. The isolated tenant design addresses separation between firms. Which regions the Enterprise residency option covers, and whether private hosting means a dedicated cloud project or on premises, is not published.

Customer data and content are stored and processed in the United States, hosted by default in the East 1 regions of AWS and MongoDB. Replication stays within other regions in the United States unless agreed in writing. Customers may ask for a specific region, which Visalaw accommodates where feasible and may charge for. The service runs on shared infrastructure with data separated logically by organization at the application and database layers. Content goes to model providers over encrypted API calls and may not be kept beyond the call. Encryption keys are managed by the cloud providers, with no customer managed or tenant specific keys. The Data Processing Addendum describes a dedicated tenant environment, so the two addenda describe tenancy differently.

A SOC 2 Type 1 audit in 2024 and a SOC 2 Type 2 audit in 2025 are complete, with annual audits, regular third party penetration tests, a vulnerability disclosure program and staff security training, according to CaseBlink's security page. It lists its controls by family, access control, business continuity, change management, incident response and information security, 52 in all. The audit reports and its zero data retention agreement with OpenAI can be requested through its trust center at trust.caseblink.com. The data processing agreement lets a current SOC 2 Type 2 report stand in for a customer audit, which ties the attestation to the contract. The security page describes the platform as SOC 2 Type 2 compliant and certified, though SOC 2 produces an auditor's report rather than a certificate. No auditor or report period is named publicly.

The security program is audited against SOC 2 Type II, and ISO 27001 is targeted for the fourth quarter of 2026. Under the Security Addendum, audit reports, penetration test summaries and answers to security questionnaires come on request at no cost, and Visalaw will adopt an equivalent standard if it drops an audit. The security page lists a dedicated chief information security officer, SAML single sign on, audit logs, IP allow listing and configurable data lifecycle controls. It points to a trust portal hosted on Drata that opens after an access request. The auditor, report period and scope, including whether the models are covered, are not published.

The data processing agreement's subprocessor schedule names OpenAI OpCo, LLC as the third party AI provider, processing in the United States, alongside Google LLC for hosting and Slack Technologies LLC. CaseBlink must give at least 15 days' notice before any new subprocessor can access customer personal data, with seven days for the firm to object on reasonable grounds. The security page describes a zero data retention agreement with OpenAI, available on request, under which data is not retained after each operation and is not used for training. A firm can tell its clients from a document it signs which companies see their passports, employment records and asylum declarations. The specific OpenAI models and versions behind drafting, research and extraction are not named, and a change of model within OpenAI would not trigger the notice.

Section 6 of the Security Addendum sends content to contracted model providers over encrypted APIs and bars them from training on it, keeping it beyond a single call or passing it to anyone else. Visalaw keeps documentation of which subprocessors receive data at each stage. The Platform Agreement and Data Processing Addendum give at least 60 days' notice before a new subprocessor or a material change in scope, with a right to object. The model providers themselves are listed only in a trust portal that opens after an access request, and no model is named for any feature. The connector for Claude names CourtListener, which receives case law requests without account details.

Prices, units and plan contents are published. Lite costs $100 per seat per month ($92 billed annually) for document categorization, labeling, quality checks, exhibit lists and tabbed PDF export; Core costs $200 per seat per month ($183 annually) and adds AI research, drafting, form filling, RFE responses and the Autopilot agent; Pro costs $300 per seat per month ($275 annually) and adds case management, now in beta. Every plan includes unlimited cases and a 14 day free trial, annual billing includes one month free, and Enterprise, for 15 or more users with private hosting, a white label portal and dedicated support, is priced on request. The Service Agreement sets out the rest of the commercial terms: one seat per named person, reasonable use limits, trial cancellation, automatic renewal and notice of fee changes. Cases are unlimited per seat, in a category often priced per case.

Core costs $220 a month per license, billed annually, for research, chat, document analysis, translation, BIA decisions and a case management integration, with occasional drafts at $150 each. Pro is $480 a month per license and adds ten petition or brief drafts a month, about $26 a draft. Enterprise, for firms of three or more, is quoted and adds unlimited drafting, free paralegal access, dedicated onboarding and team controls. A comparison table shows what each plan includes, and a return calculator models recovered hours and value from a firm's own matters, hourly rate or fees, with its assumptions shown. Each attorney or paralegal using the platform needs a license, and a two week free trial opens after a demo.

CaseBlink is built only for US immigration law. It covers employment visas (H-1B, L-1, O-1, TN, E-2 and E-3), employment green cards (EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-1C, EB-2 NIW, PERM and EB-3), family based petitions, humanitarian cases including asylum, DACA, TPS and U and T visas, naturalization, and RFE responses across them. It is sold to solo practitioners, high volume immigration practices, paralegals and corporate immigration departments. Plans are per seat, from a single user up to Enterprise for 15 or more, and named customers run from boutique immigration firms to Dorsey & Whitney. A separate service matches foreign nationals with partner firms that use the platform. Nothing published says where drafting or research is less reliable, for instance humanitarian narratives against employment petitions, or which forms Autopilot cannot yet assemble end to end. Removal defense is not mentioned at all.

Visalaw AI is built for immigration attorneys and professionals who are AILA members, from solo practitioners such as Ken Robinson to firms such as Kuck Baxter and Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners, and Enterprise serves firms of three or more. The platform lists the case types it drafts. Business petitions run from O-1A and EB-1A to H-1B, L-1 and E-2, and family matters include I-485, I-601A and N-400. Humanitarian work covers asylum, T and U visas and VAWA, alongside RFEs, motions and BIA appeals. Research covers United States immigration law and case law and a Canadian immigration law collection. Paralegals work only under a supervising attorney's account. Work outside immigration is outside the product, and the connector for Claude leaves state courts out of case law results unless asked.