¶2 Lianjun Teng, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo questions of law, including claims of due process violations due to ineffective assis *771 tance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.
¶3 The BIA abused its discretion in denying Teng’s motion for failure to comply with the requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 687 (BIA 1988), because Teng demonstrated substantial compliance where he submitted a detailed declaration explaining his reasons for not filing a disciplinary complaint against his attorney. See Lo v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 934, 937-38 (9th Cir.2003) (sufficient compliance with Lozada where petitioner, inter alia, explained absence of bar complaint).
¶4 PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.