
    Basil Uzoma ONYIDO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 13-60544
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    March 20, 2014.
    Basil Uzoma Onyido, Imo State, Nigeria, pro se.
    Robert Michael Stalzer, Esq., Trial Attorney, Tangerlia Cox, Arthur L. Rabin, Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Basil Uzoma Onyido seeks review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his motion to sua sponte reopen and reconsider his 1999 deportation. See In re Onyido, 22 I. & N. Dec. 552 (BIA 1999). This was the second such motion Onyido filed in 2013, almost 14 years after he was deported. The BIA denied the motion as both time-barred and number-barred, regardless of how it was construed. The BIA also found no exceptional circumstances to justify reopening, and it noted that relief was barred by Onyido’s deportation. In his petition for review, Onyido challenges his deportation and the underlying aggravated felony conviction.

Onyido invoked the BIA’s authority to sua sponte reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2. Section 1003.2(a) affords an Immigration Judge (IJ) or the BIA “complete discretion” to deny a motion to reopen, and we therefore have “no legal standard by which to judge” such a decision. Ramos-Bonilla v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 216, 220 (5th Cir.2008). We accordingly lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision. See id.; Enriquez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 246, 249-50 (5th Cir.2004) (citing other circuits’ decisions holding the same). Onyido’s petition for review is DISMISSED. All motions are DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     