Bratco

MEMORANDUM ****

Alexandru Dumitru Bratco, a citizen of Moldova, filed a petition for review of the denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The parties are familiar with the facts and we do not recite them here except as necessary.

The BIA summarily affirmed the decision of the Immigration Judge (“U”), therefore we review the IJ’s decision as *181 the final agency determination. Nuru v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1207, 1215 (9th Cir.2005). This court reviews the IJ’s interpretation of legal questions de novo. Id. Factual findings are reviewed for substantial evidence. Id. “To reverse the IJ’s finding, we ‘must find that the evidence not only supports that conclusion, but compels it[.]’ ” Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1148, 1151 (9th Cir.2005) (quoting INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992)).

Bratco argues that the IJ erroneously concluded that he was not persecuted on account of an imputed political opinion because the record established that he was attacked by policemen as he approached a demonstration. However, the record does not compel a…