Kaur

MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated petitions for review, Rajwant and Navjyot Kaur; natives and citizens of India, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders denying their motion to reconsider the denial of their first motion to reopen, dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision rejecting their second motion to reopen, and denying their third motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider or reopen, and review de novo questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny both petitions for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reconsider where they failed to identify any error of law or fact in the BIA’s previous order concluding that petitioners’ June 19, 2006, motion to reopen was properly denied as untimely. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (b)(1). The BIA also did not abuse its discretion in rejecting petitioners’ ineffective assistance of counsel claim where they failed to comply with the requirements set forth in Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637, 639 (BIA 1988), and the…