Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369 (AAO 2010)

(1) For purposes of establishing the requisite continuous residence in naturalization proceedings pursuant to section 316(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1427(b) (2006), a publicly held corporation may be deemed an “American firm or corporation” if the applicant establishes that the corporation is both incorporated in the United States and trades its stock exclusively on U.S. stock exchange markets.

(2) When an applicant’s employer is a publicly held corporation that is incorporated in the United States and trades its stock exclusively on U.S. stock markets, the applicant need not demonstrate the nationality of the corporation by establishing the nationality of those persons who own more than 51% of the stock of that firm. Matter of Warrach, 17 I&N Dec. 285, 286-87 (Reg. Comm’r 1979), clarified.

(3) In most administrative immigration proceedings, the applicant must prove by a preponderance of evidence that he or she is eligible for the benefit sought.

(4) Even if the director has some doubt as to the truth, if the petitioner submits relevant, probative, and credible evidence that leads the director to believe that the claim is “more likely than not” or “probably” true, the applicant has satisfied the standard of proof. Matter of E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm’r 1989), followed.

(5) If the director can articulate a material doubt, it is appropriate for the director to either request additional evidence or, if that doubt leads the director to believe that the claim is probably not true, deny the application or petition.

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE

Except where a different standard is specified by law, a petitioner or applicant in administrative immigration proceedings must prove by a preponderance of evidence that he or she is eligible for the benefit sought. See, e.g., Matter of Martinez, 21 I&N Dec. 1035, 1036 (BIA 1997) (noting that the petitioner must prove eligibility by a preponderance of evidence in visa petition proceedings); Matter of Soo Hoo, 11 I&N Dec. 151, 152 (BIA 1965) (finding that the petitioner had not established eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence because the submitted evidence was not credible); cf. Matter of Patel, 19 I&N Dec. 774, 782-3 (BIA 1988) (noting that section 204(a)(2)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(2)(A) (Supp. IV 1986), requires a higher standard of clear and convincing evidence to rebut the presumption of a fraudulent prior marriage).

See more info at the BURDEN OF PROOF — PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE page.

ONE YEAR PHYSICAL PRESENCE REQUIREMENT

USCIS announced the policy change last year and I didn't see it.

POLICY UPDATE FOR ASYLEE ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS

Asylees do not have to wait a year to file an I-485 because USCIS will now count the year from the date of adjudication of the I-485 not its filing date.

https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-m-chapter-2

https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-a

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8#0-0-0-11771

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1159&num=0&edition=prelim#0-0-0-194

REQUIREMENTS TO ADJUST STATUS

According to the USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 7 – Adjustment of Status, Part M – Asylee Adjustment, an asylee may adjust their status to a lawful permanent resident if they meet the following four requirements:

✅ 1 year physical presence in the US after being granted asylum

✅ Continuing to meet the definition of a refugee or being the spouse/child of the principal asylee

✅ Not having firmly resettled in a foreign country

✅ Admissible to the US as an immigrant at the time of adjustment of status examination