Lietzke v. City of Montgomery et al

Filing 9

ORDER re: Plaintiff's 6 Motion for Recusal. The Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Judge Robart's refusal to recuse himself from this matter is AFFIRMED and Mr. Lietkze's motion (Dkt. # 6 ) is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (PM) cc: plaintiff via first class mail

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8

BILL LIETZKE,
Plaintiff,

9
10

CASE NO. C17-1317-JLR

v.

11

CITY OF MONTGOMERY, et al.,

12

ORDER ON REVIEW OF
MOTION TO RECUSE

Defendants.

13

On October 4, 2017, Plaintiff Bill Lietzke filed an apparent proposed order in this matter.

14 See Dkt. #6. The Court interpreted Mr. Lietzke’s filing as seeking in part the recusal of Judge
15 James L. Robart. Dkt #8. Judge Robart has declined to recuse himself and, in accordance with
16 this Court’s Local Rules, referred that decision to the Chief Judge for review. Id.; LCR 3(e).
17

A judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his

18 impartiality “might reasonably be questioned.” Federal judges also shall disqualify themselves in
19 circumstances where they have a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal
20 knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding. 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(1). Mr.
21 Lietzke’s proposed order provides no allegations, let alone evidence, of bias or prejudice against
22 him on the part of the Court. See Dkt. #6. Nor does Mr. Lietzke cite to any proper basis in statute
23 or case law for recusal. In the absence of any allegations that Judge Robart “has a personal bias
24
ORDER ON REVIEW OF MOTION TO RECUSE1

1 or prejudice either against [Mr. Lietzke] or in favor of any adverse party” (28 U.S.C. § 144), served
2 as a lawyer in this controversy while in private practice (id., § 145), or has a financial interest in
3 the litigation (id.), there is no basis for recusal and Judge Robart was justified in declining to do
4 so.
5

Accordingly, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Judge Robart’s refusal to recuse

6 himself from this matter is AFFIRMED and Mr. Lietkze’s motion (Dkt. #6) is DENIED. The
7 Clerk shall provide a copy of this Order to Mr. Lietzke.
8

DATED this 23 day of October, 2017.

9

A

10

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER ON REVIEW OF MOTION TO RECUSE2