Shipp v. United States of America et al

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is ordered that the petitioner's motion for recusal of the magistrate judge is denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge Keith F. Giblin on 10/10/17. (mrp, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
VAUDA VIRGLE SHIPP, JR.

§

VS.

§

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-275

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Vauda Virgle Shipp, Jr., an inmate proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On June 29, 2017, the magistrate judge recommended
dismissing the petition. Petitioner subsequently moved for recusal of the magistrate judge pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 455.
Title 28 U.S.C. § 455 requires a federal judge to disqualify himself in any proceeding in which
his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Disqualification is appropriate
if a reasonable person, with knowledge of all the circumstances, would question the court’s
impartiality. United States v. Anderson, 160 F.3d 231, 233 (5th Cir. 1998). In this instance, petitioner
has utterly failed to set forth any facts which would cause an objective observer to question the court’s
impartiality. Petitioner contends that he previously sued the magistrate judge in cause number 1:16CV-71 and 1:16-CV-154, and, thus, the magistrate judge should be disqualified from this case. In fact,
the magistrate judge was not identified as a party to either case, although both cases were referred to
the undersigned magistrate judge for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this
court.
It appears that petitioner seeks disqualification of the magistrate judge because he was
dissatisfied with rulings in the earlier cases. However, absent surrounding comments or accompanying

.
opinion, judicial rulings alone will rarely constitute a valid basis for a motion to recuse or disqualify.
Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994); Andrade v. Chojnacki, 338 F.3d 448, 455 (5th Cir.
2003). An objective observer would not question the court’s impartiality based on the rulings in the
earlier cases. Therefore, the motion to disqualify shall be denied.
It is accordingly
ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for recusal of the magistrate judge (document no. 3) is
DENIED.
SIGNED this the 10th day of October, 2017.

____________________________________
KEITH F. GIBLIN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2