For what it's worth, as a O-1 scientist you have to provide evidence that you:

...are a member of scholarly/professional organizations;

...have published original research works scientifically and internationally (peer reviewed publications);

...that you have judged the work of others (supervised and/or examined Ph.D. candidates);

...that you have consulted to governments;

...that you have repeatedly been invited as guest speaker at conferences, trade fairs or universities;

...that you won major international scholarships and awards (e.g. best paper awards at conferences, Masters's/doctoral scholarships from prestigious universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or MIT;

...that three referees that are themselves O-1 level equivalents deem you worthy of receiving O-1 status;

...that you are a named inventor on patent applications and granted patents;

...that you have received media coverage;

...that you abilities are reflected in higher than typical compensation/salary/remuneration;

...that you won major international scholarships and awards (e.g. best paper awards at conferences, Masters's/doctoral scholarships from prestigious universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or MIT; or

...that you have published significant works (i.e., works that created impact through citations, business creation, or software systems using the methods described therein).

Usually, from an official ist similar to the above (which I re-wrote from memory here), three out of nine or so checkboxes is the lowest bar for an O-1, and if you tick all of them and work with a specialist law firm, then it should be a slam dunk; my O-1 took about six months from application to grant back in 2008 (no payments of any "expediting fees" if they exist were made as far as I know).