Juan Fernando Villalon-Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, was initially ordered removed in 2009 on the basis that he previously was convicted of an aggravated felony and of two crimes involving moral turpitude that did not arise out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct. In 2011, he returned to the United States without authorization, and the Department of Homeland Security determined that he was subject to removal through reinstatement of the 2009 order of removal. Villalon-Rodriguez filed a petition for review of the reinstatement order.

Reinstatement of a deportation order constitutes a final order and, thus, a petition for review from that order must be filed within 30 days. See Ojeda-Terrazas v. Ashcroft, 290 F.3d 292, 295 (5th Cir. 2002); 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1). A timely petition for review is a jurisdictional requirement. Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 405, 115 S.Ct. 1537, 131 L.Ed.2d 465 (1995); see Navarro-Miranda v. Ashcroft, 330 F.3d 672, 676 (5th Cir. 2003).

The record supports, and Villalon-Rodriguez does not dispute, that his petition for review was filed more than 30 days after the reinstatement notice was issued. Thus, his petition for review is untimely, and we lack jurisdiction. See Stone, 514 U.S. at 386, 115 S.Ct. 1537; Ojedar-Terrazas, 290 F.3d at 295; § 1252(b)(1).

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION; MOTION TO FILE REPLY BRIEF OUT OF TIME DENIED.