of removal and the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA) denial of his motion to reopen. We deny the petition for review of the final order of removal. We grant the petition for review of the denial of reopening and remand for a renewed exercise of agency discretion. 1. The BIA decision properly relied on Ramos’s false sworn testimony before the asylum officer and before the immigration judge to hold that Ramos lacked good moral character and was therefore ineligible for cancellation of removal. See Bernal v. INS, 154 F.3d 1020, 1022 (9th Cir.1998). 2. Ramos waived his argument on appeal as to the lack of substantiation of his false sworn testimony before the asylum officer because he failed to raise that challenge before the BIA. See Ramos v. INS, 246 F.3d 1264, 1266-67 (9th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Even if not waived, the argument lacks merit
holding that we lack jurisdiction to review a claim not brought before the bia even when the bia addresses it sua sponte holding that we lack jurisdiction to consider a claim not raised before the bia even when the bia sua sponte considers the claim holding that we lack jurisdiction when a petitioner fails to argue before the bia that there is no evidence he was under oath during the asylum interview holding that we lack jurisdiction to consider claims that have not been raised before the bia holding that we lack jurisdiction to consider claims not raised below by the alien even when the bia reviews the claim sua sponte