The phrase "assert that one of" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when you want to state or declare that a particular individual or thing is among a group or category being discussed.
Example: "In her research, she asserts that one of the key factors influencing climate change is deforestation."
Alternatives: "claim that one of" or "state that one of".
It was a lost weekend for Hernandez, who returned from rehabilitating in Tampa, Fla., on Friday and immediately created a controversy by asserting that one of the Yankees' coaches supposedly said he was not "as hurt as much as I thought".
Jay Berman, the chief executive of the group, asserted that one of the major reasons for the decline was "the fact that the commercial value of music is being widely devalued by mass copying and piracy," but the group did not offer a specific analysis of the phenomenon, or its impact.
It asserts that one of Mr. bin Laden's most senior associates, who is not named, was the man "responsible for the detailed planning of the attacks," and that at least three hijackers "have already been positively identified as associates of Al Qaeda," Mr. bin Laden's organization.
In this context, Ellenbogen (2012) asserts that one of the most important challenges is closing the gap between experimental research and naturalistic field studies.
Blackmore [37] and Rafailidis [38], asserted that one of the main factors affecting the performance of roof-mounted wind turbines is the building roof shape (roof effect).
In Arianna Huffington's book Thrive, she asserts that one of the pillars to well-being is wonder.
In a recent radio interview, Buck agreed with host Jim Pfaff when Pfaff asserted that "one of the great weaknesses of the Republican Party" is not dealing with social issues.
Huff et al. (2008) asserted that one of the "well-accepted observations" upon which the "relevance of experimental bioassays to humans" rests is that "findings from independently conducted bioassays on the same chemicals are consistent".
So far, one cannot assert that one observer-informant is closer than the other to a gold standard of estimating a child's mental health [ 1, 8].
The paradigm Hatt et al. put forward asserts that one strength of randomized trials is to answer definitively, "Does it work?" But for the kinds of complex programs public health must muster, there is generally no absolute answer to that question or to its companion question, "How well does it work?" Rather, the answer much depends on how and in what situation "it" is done.
