Erickson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank NA

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 JOHN ERICKSON et al., CASE NO. 2:23-cv-01801-LK 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING VOLUNTARY 12 v. RECUSAL 13 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. et al., 14 Defendants. 15

16 This matter comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiffs John and Shelley Erickson’s 17 “Affidavit of Notice of N[e]farious Prejudice of Judge King and Judge Pechman,” Dkt. No. 86, 18 which the Court construes as a motion for recusal. Having considered the motion and the remainder 19 of the record, the undersigned judge declines to voluntarily recuse herself from this case. 20 Under the Local Civil Rules of this Court, whenever a motion to recuse is filed pursuant to 21 28 U.S.C. § 144 or 28 U.S.C. § 455, “the challenged judge will review the motion papers and 22 decide whether to recuse voluntarily.” LCR 3(f). If the challenged judge decides not to recuse, “he 23 or she will direct the clerk to refer the motion to the chief judge, or the chief judge’s designee.” Id. 24 1 Here, the Ericksons seek the recusal of the undersigned judge because she is “biased and 2 prejudice[d.]” Dkt. No. 86 at 11. The Ericksons do not support that allegation and instead reiterate 3 their arguments regarding the merits of their claims. Id. at 4–16. However, their disagreement with 4 the Court’s rulings in their case does not constitute grounds for recusal. See, e.g., Liteky v. United

5 States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994) (noting that “judicial rulings alone almost never constitute a valid 6 basis for a bias or partiality motion”); United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 1986) 7 (explaining that “a judge’s prior adverse ruling is not sufficient cause for recusal”). 8 Because there is no basis to find that the undersigned judge’s impartiality might reasonably 9 be questioned or to find that there is an appearance of bias in this case, and because none of the 10 other conditions for recusal laid out in 28 U.S.C. § 455 are met, the undersigned judge declines to 11 recuse herself from this case. The undersigned judge DIRECTS the Clerk to refer the Motion to 12 Chief Judge Estudillo in accordance with Local Civil Rule 3(f). 13 Dated this 10th day of April, 2024. 14 A

15 Lauren King United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24