MEMORANDUM **

Ignacio Cedillo Barcenas and Maria Del Carmen Estrada De Cedillo, natives and *393 citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002), and we deny the petition for review.

- The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ second motion to reopen as untimely and number-barred because the motion was filed over four years after the BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish materially changed circumstances in Mexico to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitations for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 2010) (evidence lacked materiality because it simply recounted “generalized conditions” in country that did not show petitioner’s situation was “appreciably different from the dangers faced by her fellow citizens”). Further, we reject petitioners’ contentions that the BIA failed to consider arguments or record evidence, see Najmabadi 597 F.3d at 990-91 (BIA adequately considered evidence and sufficiently announced its decision).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.