Gampu

MEMORANDUM ***

Atto Gampu and Charlotte Irene Tuuk, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying both their motion to reopen removal proceedings and their motion to reconsider. Where we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252a. We review the BIA’s denial of motions to reopen and reconsider for abuse of discretion. See INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323 , 112 S.Ct. 719 , 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

To the extent the petitioners challenge the BIA’s initial dismissal of their appeal, we lack jurisdiction as they failed to petition for review within thirty days of that decision. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b)(1).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied the petitioners’ motion to reconsider because they failed to articulate either a legal or factual error in the BIA’s dismissal of their appeal. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (b)(1); see also Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 895 (9th Cir.2003).

The BIA’s decision to deny the petitioners’ motion to reopen to present new evidence in support of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal…