With dated records from that year: version-control history under her name, design documents, project assignments, internal training she gave or received, and payroll showing she was an employee throughout. The records should show acquisition and use, not just presence.
Date every piece of evidence
The examiner needs to see two things at once: that the knowledge exists and that she gained it while employed by the Canadian company within the qualifying period. Export version-control logs filtered to her account for the relevant components, with dates. Add design documents or architecture notes with her name and the date created.
Include the project assignment record that put her on the alert-engine work and any internal training material she wrote for colleagues. Then lay the twelve months of payroll beside that timeline so the employment status is visible for the same dates. If part of the year was spent as an independent contractor before she was hired, say so and check whether the remaining continuous employment still meets the one-year rule, rather than presenting the contractor period as employment.
A letter from the chief technology officer summarizing her contribution is useful as a guide to the records but should point to them rather than replace them. Create a record map that links each claimed capability to a dated work product and to the employment period. Hypothetical example: a Canadian precision-saw manufacturer wants to transfer the specialist who calibrates its proprietary blade-coating process.
Calibration logs, internal troubleshooting notes, training records, and pay statements can show both the unusual knowledge and how she acquired it. The company must decide which confidential pages can be redacted without hiding the point; a generic confidentiality claim leaves the examiner unable to evaluate the asserted specialization.