and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R.App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 1 . The IJ found that Mr. Umoh’s CIMT convictions made him inadmissible and therefore ineligible for adjustment of status. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(2)(A)(i)(I); 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a) (listing admissibility as one requirement for adjustment of status). Mr. Umoh does not dispute that, in order to be granted adjustment of status, he must obtain a waiver of inadmissibility under § 1182(h). 2 .Mr. Umoh also addresses the BIA's denial of his motion for reconsideration in his opening brief. Because he failed to file a separate petition for review, we do not have jurisdiction to review that decision. See Desta v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 1179, 1183 (10th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). 3 . Mr. Umoh concedes that he is removable as
holding under third circuit law that the denial of a motion for reconsideration is reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that a reviewing court is not to substitute its decision for that of the board holding that reviewing court may consider trial evidence in reviewing denial of motion to suppress holding court precluded from reviewing denial of motion for reconsideration where petitioner did not separately seek review of that decision holding that the standard of review for the denial of a motion for reconsideration is governed by the law of the regional circuit