Carrillo

MEMORANDUM **

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order de *63 nying petitioner’s motion for administrative closure and declining to sua sponte reopen petitioner’s removal proceedings.

This court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s refusal to reopen removal proceedings sua sponte. Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159-60 (9th Cir.2002). This court also lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of a request for administrative closure. Diaz-Covarrubias v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 1114, 1117-20 (9th Cir.2009). Accordingly, respondent’s unopposed motion to dismiss in part is granted.

Respondent’s unopposed motion for summary disposition in part is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). To the extent that petitioner’s motion could be construed as a motion to reopen removal proceedings, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that petitioner’s motion to reopen was untimely. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2); Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir.2004)…