Jones v. Wackenhut % Google Inc.

Filing 63

ORDER denying 53 Motion for Recusal; denying 54 Motion asking Chief Judge Jack T. Camp to Intervene; denying 54 Motion for Hearing. Signed by Magistrate Judge Russell G. Vineyard on 11/28/07. (vs)

Jones v. Wackenhut % Google Inc.

Doc. 63

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION DONALD JONES,
Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v.

1:07-CV-567-CC-RGV

WACKENHUT and GOOGLE, INC.,
Defendants.

ORDER "Plaintiff's Response and Appeal to Judge's Order," [Doc. 53], which has been docketed as a motion, and "Plaintiff['s] Motion Asking Chief Judge Jack T Camp to Intervene in the Case," [Doc. 54], have been submitted to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for ruling. The Court hereby DENIES both motions. In "Plaintiff's Response and Appeal to Judge's Order," plaintiff asks District Judge Clarence Cooper, who is assigned to this case, to disqualify himself "for bias agaisnt [sic] the plaintiff" and to withdraw his orders. [Doc. 53]. Judge Cooper recently denied plaintiff's request for recusal in an Order dated November 16, 2007, [Doc. 60], and, because plaintiff has offered no valid basis for recusal, the Court DENIES the relief requested in "Plaintiff's Response and Appeal to Judge's Order." [Doc. 53].

Dockets.Justia.com

In "Plaintiff[']s Motion Asking Chief Judge Jack T Camp to Intervene in the Case," plaintiff requests the intervention of Chief Judge Camp in the case "because of prejudice in the case." [Doc. 54]. Plaintiff states that "Judge Cooper is using crafty tactic [sic] to help the defendant made the plaintiff made lengthy appeals [sic]." [Id.]. Plaintiff requests a conference "if it will help." [Id.]. A conference to resolve this issue is not needed because there is no basis in law or fact for ordering a re-assignment or referral of this case to Chief Judge Camp. As stated, Judge Cooper has already denied plaintiff's request for recusal, [Doc. 60], and an implicit finding in that Order is that this is not a proceeding in which Judge Cooper's impartiality might reasonably be questioned and that Judge Cooper suffers from no personal bias or prejudice against plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)-(b)(1). See also [Doc. 52 at 2 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)-(b)(1)]. As Judge Cooper stated in a previous order, a litigant is "not entitled to the judge of his choice." [Doc. 52 at 3 (citing In re BellSouth Corp., 334 F.3d 941, 970 (11th Cir. 2003)]. For this reason, the Court DENIES "Plaintiff[']s Motion Asking Chief Judge Jack T Camp to Intervene in the Case." [Doc. 54]. IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of November, 2007.

RUSSELL G. VINEYARD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2