Sierra v. Hoskins et al

Filing 9

ORDER denying 5 Request to Reassign filed by Regulo Sierra. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 9/8/2011. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

In re

No. C 11-03630 CRB

12

REGULO SIERRA,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
REASSIGN

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Appellant,
v.
JANINA M. HOSKINS, Chapter 11 Trustee
in Bankruptcy,
Appellee.

/

On August 19, 2011, Appellant filed a one-page “Petition by Appellant to assign a
[sic] another Judge to the case” (“Motion”). There are two means for disqualifying a district
judge, either pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 144 or 28 U.S.C. § 455. Since Appellant did not file an
affidavit attesting to actual personal bias against him or in favor of another party as required
by 28 U.S.C. § 144, the Court assumes the Motion is pursuant to § 455.
Under § 455(a), recusal may be had where the judge’s impartiality may reasonably be
questioned or under § 455(b) where the judge “knows that he . . . has [an] interest that could
be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4).
Here Appellant identified two potential grounds for disqualification in his motion: (1)
a conflict of interest; and (2) prejudice due to other appeals in the Sophie Ng bankruptcy
case. First, Appellant provides no explanation or allegations to support a conflict of interest.
He was not a party in other appeals in the Sophie Ng case, nor does he state he has a vested

1

interest in those actions. Second, adverse rulings in the prior appeals “do not constitute the

2

requisite bias or prejudice” to support disqualification. United States v. Azhocar, 581 F.2d

3

735, 739 (9th Cir. 1978); see also Berger v. United States, 255 U.S. 22, 34 (1921). As

4

Appellant fails to identify any grounds for disqualification, nor does the Court discern any

5

such grounds, the Motion is DENIED.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: September 8, 2011

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

G:\CRBALL\2011\3630\Order Denying Motion to Reassign.wpd

2