Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Esther Kinobe Mpungu Nakagiri, a native and citizen of Uganda, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s order denying her motion to reopen. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the relevant orders, Nakagiri’s affidavit, and the various supporting exhibits, and conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion. See INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 814, 323-24, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992); Mosere v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 397, 400 (4th Cir.2009); Barry v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 741, 747 (4th Cir.2006); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(3) (2014). Further, we lack jurisdiction to review the Board’s decision not to sua sponte reopen Nakagi-ri’s removal proceedings. Mosere, 552 F.3d at 400-01. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Nakagiri (B.I.A. May 22, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.