Petrosyan

MEMORANDUM **

In this consolidated case, Rafayel Petrosyan, on behalf of himself and derivatively his wife and son, petitions for review of both the Board of Immigration Appeal’s (“BIA”) denial of his motion to reopen his application for relief from removal as well as the underlying denial of his application. We grant the petition with regard to his motion to reopen his application for relief from removal. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of this case, we will not recount them here.

I

We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider. Salta v. INS, 314 F.3d 1076, 1078 (9th Cir.2002); Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002). Though the BIA has discretion to deny a motion to reopen “even if the party moving has made out a prima facie case for relief,” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (a), we “will reverse a denial of a motion to reopen if the denial was arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law.” Bhasin v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 977, 983 (9th Cir.2005) (internal quotation marks omitted). We review the BIA’s determination *587 of questions of law de novo. De Martinez v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 759, 761 (9th Cir.…