MEMORANDUM **

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 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)(l)(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, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (noting that “[t]o reverse the [agency] finding we must find that the evidence not only suppoRs that conclusion but compels it”) (emphasis in original).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.