system.” Black’s Law Dictionary 980 (10th ed.2014) (quoting Fleming James Jr., Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr. & John Leubsdorf, Civil Procedure § 2.1, at 55 (5th ed.2001)) (internal quotation mark omitted). By contrast, a BIA . regulation, at least one that does not purport to interpret a statute, is, in effect, the Attorney General telling himself what he may or may not do; presumably, he could simply change the rules if he were so inclined. That being the case, such regulations are more like a court's internal rules, such as our own standing orders, than external constraints that could properly be conceived of as jurisdictional. Second, even if a regulation could be jurisdictional, the appeal-waiver rule would not so qualify. See Irigoyen-Briones v. Holder, 644 F.3d 943, 949 (9th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court has "urged that a rule
holding 30day limit to be mandatory and jurisdictional holding that the 30day deadline to file a notice of appeal with the bia was not jurisdictional holding that the 30day notice of appeal requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional holding 57 days notice before deadline to file a complaint under  523 was sufficient notice when creditor had actual notice of filing holding that in the appeal of a final order the fjailure to file any notice within the 30day period constitutes an irremediable jurisdictional defect