Gonzalez

MEMORANDUM **

Cesar Gonzalez Gonzalez and Maria Araceli Gonzalez Valdez, natives and citi *632 zens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely, because they did not file the motion within 90 days of the BIA’s final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and did not demonstrate prima facie eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), see 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16 (c)(2) (applicant for CAT relief must prove “it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal”); Mendez-Gutierrez v. Ashcroft, 340 F.3d 865, 869-70 (9th Cir.2003) (“[P]rima facie eligibility for the relief sought is a prerequisite for the granting of a motion to reopen.”).

Petitioners’ reliance on Khourassany v. INS, 208 F.3d 1096 , 1099 & n. 2 (9th Cir.2000), is misplaced. In that…