Silvestre Sarat-Agustin petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA) decision dismissing his appeal of the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his motion to reopen. We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Zhao v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 295, 303 (5th Cir. 2005).

Sarat-Agustin received proper notice of the removal hearing; he personally received the Notice to Appear, which was written in English and contained notice of the removal healing, and was orally advised of the hearing in a language that he understood. Accordingly, he had to file a motion to reopen within 90 days of the date of entry of his order of removal. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(1), (b)(4)(h). He failed to do so and failed to establish changed country conditions in Guatemala that would permit him to file an untimely motion to reopen. See § 1003.23(b)(4)(i). He has therefore failed to demonstrate any abuse of discretion in the denial of his motion to reopen. See Zhao, 404 F.3d at 303-04.

Sarat-Agustin’s petition for review is DENIED.