
    Neetan SINGH, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 11-73831.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Feb. 11, 2018.
    
    Filed Feb. 14, 2013.
    George R. Willy, Esquire, Geroge R. Willy, P.C., Sugar Land, TX, for Petitioner.
    OIL, Lindsay Williams Zimliki, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Neetan Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reconsider its previous 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 reconsider. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reconsider because he failed to establish any error of fact or law in the BIA’s prior determination that he had not established the due diligence necessary for equitable tolling of the filing deadline for motions to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1); Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 678-80 (9th Cir. 2011) (equitable tolling available where petitioner shows he was prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, and acted with due diligence in discovering such circumstances).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     