Johnson v. Miller

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE BRENDA M. JOHNSON, CASE NO. C21-5539-BHS Plaintiff, ORDER ON REVIEW OF MOTION FOR RECUSAL v. AMBER MILLER, et al., Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Brenda M. Johnson’s Motion seeking recusal of Judges Creatura and Settle. Dkt #7. These judges have separately reviewed this Motion, declined to recuse, and in accordance with this Court’s Local Civil Rules, referred this matter to the undersigned for review. Dkts. #8 and #9; LCR 3(f). A judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality “might reasonably be questioned.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Federal judges also shall disqualify themselves in circumstances where they have a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding. 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(1). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 144, “whenever a party to any proceeding in a district court makes and files a timely and sufficient affidavit that the judge before whom the matter is pending has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or in favor of any adverse party, such judge shall proceed no further therein, but another judge shall be assigned to hear such proceeding.” “[A] judge’s prior adverse ruling is not sufficient cause for recusal.” United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 1986); see also Taylor v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 993 F.2d 710, 712 (9th Cir. 1993) (“To warrant recusal, judicial bias must stem from an

extrajudicial source.”). The Court has reviewed the above Motion and finds Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate bias. Plaintiff states only that Judge Settle has worked on her prior cases. Dkt. #7. Judge Settle’s involvement in related cases, even if true, is a typical practice of this Court and cannot constitute an extrajudicial source of bias. Plaintiff has otherwise failed to present a reasonable basis to question the impartiality of either Judge Creatura or Judge Settle. Accordingly, the Court finds and ORDERS that the above Orders declining to recuse, Dkts. #8 and #9, are AFFIRMED. DATED this 27th day of August, 2021.

A RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE