MEMORANDUM **

Luis Medina-Priaz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“LJ”) decision denying his motion for a continuance of his removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, including constitutional claims. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008) (per cu-riam). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA applied the correct legal standard and provided a reasoned explanation for its decision denying Medina-Priaz’s motion for a two-year continuance to await the passage of immigration-reform legislation, where the BIA invoked the applicable “good cause” legal standard and cited pertinent legal authorities. See Singh v. Holder, 638 F.3d 1264, 1274 (9th Cir. 2011) (“[A]n IJ ‘may grant a motion for continuance for good cause shown.’ ” (citation omitted)); see also Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009) (concluding that the agency applied the correct legal standard in a case where the agency “expressly cited and applied [relevant case law] in rendering its decision, which is all our review requires”).

The record belies Medina-Priaz’s contention that the BIA violated due process by failing to address his due process claim.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.