¶2 Alberto Gonzalez Rosalez, Martha Alicia Bacilio, and their child, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to remand. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to remand and review de novo due process claims alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
¶3 We agree with the BIA that the petitioners failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel. See Lin v. Ashcroft, 377 F.3d 1014, 1027 (9th Cir.2004).
¶4 In the motion to remand, petitioners presented evidence that Martha had given birth to twins, but did not claim that the new children would suffer hardship. The remaining evidence presented with the motion to reopen concerned the same basic hardship grounds as their application for cancellation of removal. We therefore lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that the evidence would not alter its prior discretionary determination that petitioners failed to establish the requisite hardship. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 600 (9th Cir.2006).
¶5 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.