Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in affirming the Board of Immigration Appeals' denial of Petitioner's motion to reopen removal proceedings when the Board applied an incorrect legal standard—the "reasonable likelihood the new evidence will change the result" standard—rather than the correct statutory standard for Convention Against Torture protection, and whether the application of a statutory legal standard to established facts constitutes a mixed question of law and fact reviewable under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D).

Whether the Ninth Circuit properly applied the standard of review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) when it affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals' denial of a motion to reopen removal proceedings based on Convention Against Torture protection, where the Board used language suggesting a heightened 'change the result' standard rather than the correct legal standard for evaluating new evidence