MEMORANDUM Martin Pimental-Lopez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) February 12, 2013 order reinstating his February 4,1999 order of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. Review of a reinstated order of removal is typically “limited to confirming the agency’s' compliance with the reinstatement regulations.” Garda de Rincon v. DHS, 539 F.3d 1133, 1137 (9th Cir. 2008); see also Morales-Izquierdo v. Gonzales, 486 F.3d 484, 498 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc).
Pimental-Lopez does not challenge any of the three requirements for reinstatement of the February 4,1999 removal order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(5); Garcia de Rincon, 539 F.3d at 1137. Instead, he challenges the underlying removal order on several legal and constitutional grounds. The governing statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1) states that the “petition to review [orders of removal] must be filed not later than 30 days after the date of the final order of removal.” Pimental-Lopez’s order of removal was entered against him on February 4, 1999.
He did not challenge that removal order until the instant appeal, which he filed on May 20, 2014. Therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction to review his challenges to the underlying order- of removal. In light of this disposition, we need not address Pimental-Lopez’s remaining arguments. PETITION DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.