Jorge Rodriguez-Alonso, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 614, 620 (9th Cir. 2006). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

To the extent Rodriguez-Alonso challenges the BIA’s June 29, 2006, order dismissing his underlying appeal, we lack jurisdiction because this petition for review is not timely as to that order. See Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2003).

We also lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Rodriguez-Alonso’s motion to reopen, which introduced further evidence of hardship to his United States citizen children. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 600 (9th Cir. 2006) (“Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) ... bars jurisdiction where the question presented is essentially the same discretionary issue orig *882 inally decided.”). It follows that we lack jurisdiction to review Rodriguez-Alonso’s contention that the BIA failed to explain adequately its reasons for denying the motion to reopen. See id. at 603-04.

Rodriguez-Alonso’s contention that the BIA violated due process by mischaracterizing the immigration judge’s weighing of the evidence is unavailing.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.