
    Leticia Noveron DE SALGADO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-70750.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 29, 2010.
    
    Filed July 26, 2010.
    Frank E. Ronzio, Ronzio & Associates, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
    Edward Earl Wiggers, Esquire, Mary Jane Candaux, Assistant Director, OIL, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Smirna Ayala, Law Offices of Ronzio & Associates, Los Angeles, CA, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Leticia Noveron De Salgado, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, and 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.

Noveron De Salgado’s Form 1-213 states that she told the immigration officer she knowingly participated in a plan to bring her undocumented niece from Tijuana to her niece’s father’s home in the United States. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s decision to disregard Noveron De Salgado’s claim that she lied to the immigration officer in order to aid her sister. See Wang v. INS, 352 F.3d 1250, 1258-59 (9th Cir.2003) (inconsistencies and implausibilities in testimonial and documentary evidence went to the heart of applicant’s claim and supported IJ’s adverse credibility finding). Because Nover-on De Salgado “provided some form of affirmative assistance to the illegally entering alien,” the agency properly determined that she was removable and that her actions constituted alien smuggling as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(E)(i). See Altamirano v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 586, 592 (9th Cir.2005).

We lack jurisdiction to review Noveron De Salgado’s contentions regarding her motion to suppress the Form 1-213 and her detention at the border because she failed to exhaust these issues before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (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.
     