With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Court has appellate jurisdiction to review only final orders of removal that have been timely appealed. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1). Petitions requesting appellate review of a BIA decision “must be filed not later than 30 days after the date of the final order of removal.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1). The statutory time limit is “both mandatory and jurisdictional.” Prekaj v. INS, 384 F.3d 265, 267 (6th Cir. 2004) (quoting Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256,1258 (9th Cir.1996)). Sunarto failed to seek review of the BIA’s October 30, 2007 decision within thirty days of the issuance of that decision. Moreover, Sunarto’s filing of a motion did not toll the time period for seeking appellate review of that decision. See, e.g., Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 389-90, 115 S.Ct. 1537,131 L.Ed.2d 465 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, to the extent that Sunarto

A: holding that the timely filing of a motion to reopen or reconsider with the bia does not toll the time period for seeking appellate court review and that the mere act of filing the motion does not render nonfinal the underlying bia decision
B: holding that the filing of a motion for reconsideration does not toll the period for seeking judicial review of the underlying order
C: holding that a second motion to reconsider served within ten days of the denial of the first motion does not extend the time period for filing a notice of appeal from the underlying judgment
D: holding that the bia does not abuse its discretion by denying a motion to reconsider when the motion merely repeats arguments that the bia has previously rejected
A.