NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 20 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EDUARDO MIZAEL PANTALEON- No. 16-71285 SIERRA, Agency No. A042-344-990 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 13, 2018** Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Eduardo Mizael Pantaleon-Sierra, 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 decision denying his motion to reopen. We dismiss the petition for review.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Our jurisdiction to review the agency’s decision denying sua sponte reopening is limited to reviewing for error its legal or constitutional basis. Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 575, 588 (9th Cir. 2016). Pantaleon-Sierra’s contention that the agency did not address his due process claims is not supported, and thus does not raise a colorable legal or constitutional claim to invoke jurisdiction. See id.; INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94, 105 (1988) (in motion to reopen cases in which the ultimate grant of relief is discretionary the BIA can determine that, even considering the newly proffered evidence, the movant would not be entitled to the discretionary grant of relief).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

2 16-71825