The following statement is from above link.
(a)(2)
..............
Example 2: An alien is admitted as a nonimmigrant, with a Form I-94 that expired on January 1, 2009. On October 5, 2008, he properly files an application for adjustment of status. He does not, however, file any application to extend his nonimmigrant stay, which expires on January 2, 2009. On January 2, 2009, he becomes subject to removal as a deportable alien under section 237(a)(1)(C) of Act because he has remained after the expiration of his nonimmigrant admission. For purposes of future inadmissibility, however, the pending adjustment application protects him from the accrual of unlawful presence.
I cannot understand why “On January 2, 2009, he becomes subject to removal as a deportable alien under section 237(a)(1)(C) of Act because he has remained after the expiration of his nonimmigrant admission.”? He properly filed I-485 before his I-94 expires. Can he be considered in AOS? Is your link out of date?
-This Memo is very new (May 6, 2009) and don’t think it is out of date. From the beginning description of this section, the author seems to try to use this example to make people understand the difference between “Unlawful presence” and “Unlawful status”. It should have meant that if a person file I-485 before the I-94 expires, he is authorized to stay even if he has no legal status. But this example seems to tell that even if you file I-485 before your I-94 expires, you may still be deported because you do not keep your legal status. Just read the last sentence: "For purposes of future inadmissibility, however, the pending adjustment application protects him from the accrual of unlawful presence" , and it seems to say: your filing of I-485 to stop the accrual of unlawful presence is for your future inadmissibility. What confusing it is!
Example 1 does make sense, but example 2 does not.
