MEMORANDUM **

Noel Estuardo Tuchez-Ordonez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying, as untimely, petitioner’s motion to reopen where the motion was filed more than two years after the BIA’s final order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). The BIA acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to establish changed country conditions in Guatemala. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii); Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir. 2004) (“the critical question is ... whether circumstances have changed sufficiently that a petitioner who previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has a well-founded fear of future persecution.”)

Tuchez-Ordonez’s contention that the BIA failed to properly consider all the evidence submitted with the motion fails because he has not overcome the presumption that the BIA reviewed the record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.