Scheidler v. Avery et al

Filing 113

ORDER denying 110 Plaintiff's Motion to Set Aside Chief Judge Pechman's Ruling for 'Fraud Upon the Court'; signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton.(DN)

1

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8

WILLIAM SCHEIDLER,

CASE NO. C12-5996 RBL

9
Plaintiff,
10
v.

ORDER DENYING OBJECTION TO
ORDER AFFIRMING DENIAL OF
DISQUALIFICATION

11
JAMES AVERY, et al.,

[DKT. #110]

12
Defendants.
13
14

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff Scheidler’s “Objection and Motion to

15 Strike Chief Judge Pechman’s Ruling for ‘Fraud Upon the Court,’” [Dkt. # 110], and his
16 Supplement to that Objection [Dkt. #111].
17

Scheidler’s first effort to obtain the court’s disqualification was filed shortly after he filed

18 this case, almost three years ago [Dkt. #11]. The motion was denied [Dkt. #28] and referred to
19 the Chief Judge [Dkt. #29]. Judge Pechman confirmed the denial [Dkt. # 37] and Scheidler
20 sought Reconsideration of her Order [Dkt. # 40]. That motion was similarly denied [Dkt. # 41].
21

The Ninth Circuit affirmed these rulings:

22

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Scheidler’s motion
for recusal of the district court judge because Scheidler failed to identify a ground
for recusal. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 144, 455; Pesnell v. Arsenault, 543 F.3d 1038, 1043
(9th Cir. 2008) (standard of review).

23
24

ORDER DENYING OBJECTION TO ORDER
AFFIRMING DENIAL OF DISQUALIFICATION 1

1 [Dkt. #51 at 4]
2

The Ninth Circuit remanded the case to permit Scheidler to amend his complaint

3 to state a viable claim, and he employed a similar strategy to obtain the court’s recusal.
4 His most recent Motion to Disqualify [Dkt. #86] was denied [Dkt. #107] and referred to
5 the Chief Judge under GR 8(c), Local Rules W.D. Wash.
6

Judge Pechman “affirmed” the decision [Dkt. #109], and Scheidler’s current Motion is a

7 sort of appeal of that order, back to this Court. Scheidler asks this Court to “strike” the Chief
8 Judge’s Order and to “set the matter of Judge Leighton’s Disqualification for a jury trial.” [See
9 Proposed Oder at Dkt. #110-2].
10

This Court does not have jurisdiction to review or overturn the Chief Judge’s Order

11 affirming this Court’s own prior Order. The corrective is an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of
12 Appeals, under the Rules and standards governing interlocutory appeals.
13

Scheidler’s “objection” (and his request for a jury trial on the issue) is DENIED.

14

Scheidler’s effort at disqualification has now been rejected eight times, by three different

15 courts. A ninth effort (other than an attempt to obtain Ninth Circuit review of this Order) will
16 result in sanctions for frivolous and abusive filings.
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

Dated this 6th day of October, 2015.

20

A

21

Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

19

22
23
24

[DKT. #110] - 2