
    Rafael Calderon QUINTERO, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-70670.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 20, 2007.
    
    Filed Jan. 8, 2008.
    Jorge I. Rodriguez-Choi, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Jennifer L. Lightbody, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Karen Y. Stewart, Esq., DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Rafael Calderon Quintero seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reconsider. We review for abuse of discretion. See Oh v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 611, 612 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA acted within its discretion in denying Calderon Quintero’s motion to reconsider because the motion failed to identify any error of fact or law in the BIA’s prior decision affirming the immigration judge’s order denying cancellation of removal for failure to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1180 n. 2 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc).

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