Vent v. Fletcher

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. California
DecidedJanuary 24, 2023
Docket3:22-cv-01651
StatusUnknown

This text of Vent v. Fletcher (Vent v. Fletcher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Vent v. Fletcher, (S.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KRISTEN VENT, Case No.: 3:22-cv-01651-RBM-DDL

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION TO RECUSE THE UNDERSIGNED 14 NATHAN FLETCHER, et al.,

15 Defendants.

16 [Doc. 9] 17 18 On January 23, 2023, Plaintiff Kristen Vent, proceeding pro se, filed a “request for 19 recusal” to the extent that either the district or magistrate judge has any interest in “FTX.” 20 (Doc. 9.) Plaintiff has offered no allegations as to how FTX is involved in the instant case. 21 In any event, Plaintiff’s motion lacks any allegations which support recusal of the 22 undersigned at this time. Plaintiff has not come forward with any facts that would lead a 23 reasonable observer “with knowledge of all the facts [to] conclude that the judge’s 24 impartiality might be reasonably questioned.” United States v. McTiernan, 695 F.3d 882, 25 891 (9th Cir. 2012) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, 26 Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 ||DATE: January 24, 2023 3 eh Bsmudes, MA ities D_ 4 HON: RUTH BERMUDEZ'MONTENEGRO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. John McTiernan
695 F.3d 882 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Vent v. Fletcher, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vent-v-fletcher-casd-2023.