further indicates that the revocation was pretextual. This Court has previously indicated that the BIA errs in dismissing a motion to reopen on disputed evidence without providing an opportunity for a further evidentiary hearing. Zhao, 265 F.3d at 95-97. The BIA made such an error in the instant case. The Petitioners sufficient evidence government of provided to call Kazakhstan’s the into BIA question reasoning in with the revoking the their citizenship. The BIA erred in ignoring this evidence with an and not opportunity providing to properly the Petitioners litigate this evidentiary issue. b. Persecution of non-Kazak nationals by Kazak government must be analyzed The instant matter closely resembles the evidentiary facts in Norani in which this Court found that the BIA had abused its discretion in denying a motion to reopen based on changed country conditions. Norani, 451 F.3d 292. In Norani, the 33