
    Leonilio Bustamante SALVADOR, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-73437.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 16, 2010.
    
    Filed March 31, 2010.
    Frank P. Sprouls, Esquire, Law Office of Ricci and Sprouls, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Leonilio Bustamante Salvador, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration 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, Ramirez-Alejandre v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 858, 874 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc), and de novo due process claims, Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Salvador’s motion to reopen for adjustment of status based on marriage to a United States citizen during removal proceedings where the supporting evidence did not meet the regulatory requirements at 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(a)(1)(iii)(B). See Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 994 (9th Cir.2003). Petitioner’s due process claim therefore fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring error for due process violation).

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