(HC) Weisner v. Allison ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FRANKIE WEISNER, No. 2:23-cv-0216 TLN CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 KATHLEEN ALLISON, 15 Respondent. 16 17 On May 25, 2023, petitioner filed a motion asking that the undersigned recuse herself 18 from this action. Recusal is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 455. Federal judges are statutorily 19 obligated to recuse if their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned” or if they “have a 20 personal bias or prejudice against a party,” United States v. $292,888.04 in U.S. Currency, 54 21 F.3d 564, 566–57 (9th Cir. 1995), as long as “the bias or prejudice stems from an extrajudicial 22 source and not from conduct or rulings made during the course of the proceeding.” Pau v. 23 Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 928 F.2d 880, 885 (9th Cir. 1991) (internal quotation omitted). 24 Petitioner seeks recusal arguing that the undersigned has demonstrated bias by “fail[ing] to 25 establish that [petitioner] was served” with respondent’s answer and by denying petitioner’s 26 motion for default judgment. ECF 25 at 3.1 As petitioner seeks recusal solely based on rulings in 27 28 1 The record reflects that petitioner was served with the answer. ECF 18 at 8. 1 | this case, fails to identify any adequate basis for recusal, and because there is no basis to 2 || reasonably question the undersigned’s impartiality, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s 3 || motion for recusal (ECF No. 25) is denied. 4 | Dated: May 30, 2023 Card ke Lg a 5 CAROLYN K DELANEY? 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9} 1 10 weis0216.rec 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28