With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". ORDER Petitioner Li Juan Zheng, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of the October 8, 2008, order of the BIA denying her motion to reconsider and reopen. In re Li Juan Zheng, No. A098 971 281 (B.I.A. Oct. 8, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. In denying Zheng’s motion to reconsider, the BIA did not err in finding that she failed to identify any legal or factual error in its reversal of the IJ’s decision granting asylum. See Jin Ming Liu v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 109, 111 (2d Cir.2006). Indeed, rather than asserting any error in the BIA’s prior decision, Zheng’s motion merely restated the arguments she had made on appeal to the BIA. See id. (<HOLDING>); Jie Chen v. Gonzales, 436 F.3d 76, 78-79 & n.

A: holding that bia abused its discretion in denying motion to reopen
B: 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
C: holding the finality of a bia order is not affected by a subsequent motion to reconsider
D: holding that merely reiterating arguments previously presented to the bia does not constitute specifying errors of fact or law as required for a successful motion to reconsider alteration omitted
B.