A dance studio sought O-2 classification for an individual accompanying a competitive ballroom dancer whose concurrent O-1 petition was filed. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the O-1 petition had been denied and its appeal dismissed, leaving no O-1 individual to support, so the O-2 petition could not be approved.

An athlete management business sought to extend O-2 status for two support workers accompanying a professional athlete holding O-1 status, working as content creators and media strategists. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the record did not show substantial experience with critical skills integral to the athlete's performance, and credibility concerns arose.

This is an O-2 decision, not O-1A. The decision concerns whether a beneficiary seeking O-2 status as an accompanying individual to an O-1 artist met the requirement of entering solely to assist the O-1. The AAO dismissed the motion, finding the beneficiary worked independently and did not establish the exclusive accompanying purpose required.

Wrestling coach seeking O-1A nonimmigrant classification. Petitioner did not establish three evidentiary criteria or sustained national/international acclaim. Petition failed procedural requirement of detailed work itinerary. AAO dismissed appeal, finding no demonstration of extraordinary ability.