
    Janette Berenice RAMIREZ VALENZUELA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 04-74172.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 11, 2005.
    
    Decided July 22, 2005.
    Alexander N. Lopez, Esq., Law Office of Alexander N. Lopez, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner.
    CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Earle B. Wilson, Esq., Leslie McKay, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Janette Berenice Ramirez Valenzuela, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of her motion to reopen her removal proceedings. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s refusal to sua sponte reopen removal proceedings pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir.2002).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Ramirez’s contentions that she received ineffective assistance of counsel, and that the unscrupulous actions of a notary improperly placed her in removal proceedings, because she did not exhaust these arguments before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir.2004) (holding that exhaustion is mandatory and jurisdictional).

All remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     