Do recommendation letters need an address or original?

Key answer

There is no formal requirement about fonts or wet-ink signatures. There is a requirement that is actually checked: that the recommender can be identified and verified, and that the letter contains specifics rather than general praise.

Breakdown from the data

The answers below are translated from the original Russian - the language of the community chats.

On fonts: there is no requirement that letters be typeset differently. The idea of varying fonts so the letters do not look written by one person solves the wrong problem. What makes an officer suspicious is identical wording and structure, not identical formatting.
On contact details: an address as such is not mandatory, but the letter must let the author be verified - role, organisation, professional relationship to you, and a way to confirm the person exists and holds that position. Letterhead and a corporate email serve that better than a home address.
On originals: filings are made with copies, and wet-ink originals are not a condition. The practical reason to keep source files is different - if the case reaches an RFE, a NOID or a return from the consulate, the letters may be needed again, sometimes more than a year later.
What actually decides it: a recommender outside your own company, a specific described episode instead of a verdict that you are outstanding, and evidence the person knows your work professionally.

This breakdown is built on real USCIS notices and public sources, linked below. It is reference material, not legal advice: officers decide similar cases differently.

What the requirements do not contain

Neither the regulation nor the Policy Manual sets any requirement about typeface, wet-ink signatures, mandatory company letterhead or the referee's home address. Every piece of advice of that kind is folklore, not rule.

The idea of 'setting the letters in different fonts so they do not look written by one person' solves the wrong problem. What makes an officer suspicious is not identical formatting but identical structure and recurring phrasing: if five letters follow one outline and reuse the same formulations, it shows regardless of the typeface.

What is actually examined

First, whether the author can be identified and verified: position, organization, professional connection to you, a way to confirm the person exists and holds that role. A corporate email address and company letterhead serve this better than a home address.

Second, independence. A letter from your direct manager weighs less than one from a specialist who knows your work but has no employment relationship with you. Fully independent letters are the strongest.

Third, specificity. Value judgments along the lines of 'an outstanding specialist' prove nothing. What works is a described episode: what you did, what came of it, how it affected the letter-writer's work or their organization.

On originals and keeping things

Filing is done with copies, and keeping originals is not a condition of anything. But there is a practical reason to keep everything: if the case reaches an RFE, a NOID, or a petition returned from a consulate, the letters may be needed again - sometimes more than a year later.

By then the referee may have changed jobs, changed email address, or stopped replying altogether. So keep the contact details, the signing date and the correspondence about drafting alongside the letters - reassembling that is sometimes harder than it was the first time.

Sources

USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 6, Part F, Chapter 2
How the agency describes criterion analysis and the second stage.
8 CFR 204.5 - the I-140 regulation

All questions on: Recommendation letters All questions on: EB-1A All questions on: O-1 visa