Ibrahima Sylla v. Eric Holder, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Ibrahima Sylla petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ dismissal of his appeal from an order of removal. We deny the petition for review.

To prevail on a due process claim, Sylla must demonstrate that the administrative proceeding was “so fundamentally unfair that [he] was prevented from reasonably presenting his case” and that the alleged violation prejudiced his case. Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.2000) (quoting Platero-Cortez v. INS, 804 F.2d 1127, 1132 (9th Cir.1986)). Prejudice occurs when “the outcome of the proceeding may have been affected by the alleged violation.” Reyes-Melendez v. INS, 342 F.3d 1001, 1006 (9th Cir.2003).

In the September 15, 2008 order, the Immigration Judge referenced Sylla’s “pattern of non-cooperation” and “pattern of delay for the sake of delay” as well as Sylla’s “lack of candor” in alleging a false marriage on his original visa application. The IJ’s expressions of exasperation did not rise to the level of bias. In Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555-56 , 114 S.Ct. 1147 , 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994), the Supreme Court explained that “expressions of impatience, dissatisfaction, annoyance, and even…