MEMORANDUM **

Haiyi Yan, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immi *756 gration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Yan’s motion to reopen as untimely, where the motion was filed three years after the BIA’s final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Yan failed to present sufficient evidence of changed circumstances in China to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit for filing motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 996-97 (evidence was immaterial in light of prior adverse credibility determination).

We lack jurisdiction over any challenge Yan makes to the agency’s underlying adverse credibility determination because this petition for review is not timely as to the agency’s order finding him not credible. See Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 995.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.