Alexander v. Peters et al

Filing 24

ORDER: Denying Motion to Recuse 3 ; Denying Motion to Recuse 5 ; Denying Motion for a Preliminary Injunction 14 ); Denying Motion for Stay 16 ; Denying Motion for Appointment of Counsel 20 . Signed on 2/4/16 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (Mailed copy to plaintiff) (dsg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
ROBERT DALE ALEXANDER,
Plaintiff,

2:15-cv-2179-CL
ORDER

v.

COLETTE PETERS, et al.,
Defendants.
CLARKE, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff has filed motions to Disqualify Judge Papak
(#3)and to Disqualify Judge Simon (#5).
Two federal
28

u.s.c.

section

is

§

455.
the

statutes govern recusal, 28 U.S.C. § 144 and
The
same:

standard
"Whether

for
a

recusal

under either

reasonable

person

with

knowledge of all the facts would conclude that the judge's
partiality might be questioned."

Taylor v.

University of California, 993 F.2d 710, 712
To

warrant

1 - ORDER

recusal,

judicial

bias

must

Regents of the
(9th Cir. 1993).
stem

form

an

extrajudicial source.

Id.

"A judge's prior adverse ruling is

not a sufficient cause for recusal.
v. Studly, 783 F.2d 934,

939

Id., citing United States

(9th Cir. 1986).

Plaintiff has not alleged any facts that would suggest
that Judges Papak or Simon might have a bias stemming from an
extra-judicial
questioned.

source

Moreover,

or

that

there

their

lS

partiality

nothing

in

the

might

be

record

to

suggest that either judge has been or will be assigned to any
matter in this case.
Accordingly,

plaintiff's

motions

(#3)

and

(#5)

are

Plaintiff's motions for preliminary injunction (#14)

and

denied.

motion

to

premature.

stay

dispositive

Plaintiff

may

motions
seek

(#16)

are

denied

reconsideration

after

as
the

defendants have appeared or filed a responsive pleading.
There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil
case.

United States v. 30.64 Acres of Land, 795 F.2d 796, 801

(9th Cir. 1986).
has

discretion

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
to

request

volunteer

§

1915 (d), this court

counsel

for

indigent

plaintiffs in exceptional circumstances, but the court has no
power to make a mandatory appointment. Mallard v. U.S. Dist.
Court of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 301-08

(1989).

I find that at this stage of the proceeding, there are
no

exceptional

2 - ORDER

circumstances

that

require

a

request

for

volunteer of counsel under§ 1915(d).
Accordingly,
counsel

plaintiff's

Motion

for

appointment

(#20) is denied.

DATED this

~/day

I
United States Magistrate Judge

3 - ORDER

of