Johnson v. Rembert

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 BRENDA M. JOHNSON, CASE NO. C20-5331-RJB 9 Plaintiff, ORDER ON REVIEW OF MOTION FOR RECUSAL 10 v. 11 TERRY LEE REMBERT, et al., Defendants. 12

13 On May 26, 2020, Plaintiff Brenda M. Johnson, proceeding pro se, filed a Motion seeking 14 to disqualify the Honorable Robert J. Bryan in this matter. Dkt. #9. On June 3, 2020, Judge Bryan 15 issued an Order declining to recuse himself and, in accordance with this Court’s Local Rules, 16 referring that decision to the Chief Judge for review. Dkt. #10; LCR 3(f). The Court will not 17 address the other rulings contained in that Order. 18 A judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his 19 impartiality “might reasonably be questioned.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Federal judges also shall 20 disqualify themselves in circumstances where they have a personal bias or prejudice concerning 21 a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding. 28 U.S.C. 22 § 455(b)(1). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 144, “whenever a party to any proceeding in a district court 23 makes and files a timely and sufficient affidavit that the judge before whom the matter is pending 24 1 has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or in favor of any adverse party, such judge 2 shall proceed no further therein, but another judge shall be assigned to hear such proceeding.” 3 “[A] judge’s prior adverse ruling is not sufficient cause for recusal.” United States v. Studley, 4 783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 1986); see also Taylor v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 993 F.2d 710, 712 5 (9th Cir. 1993) (“To warrant recusal, judicial bias must stem from an extrajudicial source.”).

6 Plaintiff’s Motion for Recusal reads simply: “Rescue [sic] against Robert J. Bryan Term 7 on Bench.” Dkt. #9 at 1. It provides no claims or evidence upon which this Court may reasonably 8 question Judge Bryan’s impartiality. For this reason, Plaintiff’s Motion fails to demonstrate that 9 the standards for recusal have been met. 10 Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that Judge Bryan’s refusal to recuse himself from 11 this matter is AFFIRMED. The Clerk SHALL provide copies of this order to Plaintiff and to all 12 counsel of record. 13 DATED this 4th day of June, 2020. 14

15 A 16 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 17 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18 19 20 21 22 23 24