¶2 Kundan Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.
¶3 Singh contends the BIA erred in denying his “motion to reopen due to ‘changed circumstances’ pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(D)” because the motion was exempt from the time limitations for motions to reopen. Contrary to Singh’s contention, this argument is foreclosed by Chen v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1028, 1031-33 (9th Cir.2008).
¶4 We reject Singh’s contention that the BIA’s order was inadequate because the BIA’s order contained “a statement of its reasons for denying the petitioner relief adequate for us to conduct our review.” See Ghaly v. INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1430 (9th Cir.1995).
¶5 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.