
    QIANYUE WU, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 10-71423.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 2, 2011.
    
    Filed Aug. 9, 2011.
    Steve Xiao Ming Luan, Law Offices of Steve Luan, Alhambra, CA, for Petitioner.
    OIL, Kohsei Ugumori, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: RYMER, IKUTA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Qianyue Wu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Vasquez v. Holder, 602 F.3d 1003, 1009 (9th Cir.2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding of marriage fraud under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(G) where Wu’s testimony failed to show that he and his former spouse intended to establish a life together at the time they were married. See Nakamoto v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 874, 882 (9th Cir.2004).

We lack jurisdiction to review Wu’s claim for relief under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H) because he failed to raise it before the agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004) (this court lacks jurisdiction to review contentions not raised before the agency).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     