
    Teresa Lara MONDRAGON, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-72853.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 11, 2010.
    
    Filed Jan. 20, 2010.
    Karla L. Kraus, Esq., Kraus Law Corporation, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner.
    CAS-District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Jonathan F. Potter, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Teresa Lara Mondragon, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her 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. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Mondragon is inadmissible, and therefore ineligible for adjustment of status, where the record evidence indicates she made a false claim to United States citizenship to gain entry to the United States in 1997. See Pichardo v. INS, 216 F.3d 1198, 1201 (9th Cir.2000) (false claim to United States citizenship is a “non-waivable ground for inadmissibility” under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii)).

We lack jurisdiction to review Mon-dragon’s challenge to her 1997 expedited removal order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(A); Avendano-Ramirez v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 813, 818-19 (9th Cir.2004).

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