Claudia Segura-Rerraza v. Eric Holder, Jr.

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 05 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CLAUDIA SEGURA-RERRAZA, No. 09-73490
Petitioner, Agency No. A096-211-027
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 20, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Claudia Segura-Rerraza, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for cancellation of removal.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
the agency’s factual findings, Ramos v. INS, 246 F.3d 1264, 1266 (9th Cir. 2001),
and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Segura-
Rerraza provided false testimony for the purpose of obtaining an immigration
benefit, thereby rendering her unable to establish the requisite good moral
character required for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(f)(6),
1229b(b)(1)(B); see also Ramos, 246 F.3d at 1266. Segura-Rerraza’s identification
of an alternative interpretation of portions of her testimony is not sufficient to
establish that the record compels reversal of the agency’s determination. See INS
v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 & n.1 (1992) (noting that “[t]o reverse the
[agency] finding we must find that the evidence not only supports that conclusion
but compels it”) (emphasis in original).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-73490