Stafne v. Burnside ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 SCOTT ERIK STAFNE, CASE NO. C16-0753-JCC 10 Plaintiff, ORDER ON REVIEW OF MOTION FOR RECUSAL 11 v. 12 FREDERICK BENJAMIN BURNSIDE, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Stafne’s Motion to disqualify the Honorable 15 Judge Coughenour. Dkt. #35. Judge Coughenour declined to recuse himself and, in 16 accordance with this Court’s Local Civil Rules, the matter was referred to the Undersigned for 17 review. Dkt. #37; LCR 3(f). 18 A judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his 19 impartiality “might reasonably be questioned.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Federal judges also shall 20 disqualify themselves in circumstances where they have a personal bias or prejudice concerning 21 a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding. 28 22 U.S.C. § 455(b)(1). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 144, “whenever a party to any proceeding in a 23 district court makes and files a timely and sufficient affidavit that the judge before whom the 24 1 matter is pending has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or in favor of any adverse 2 party, such judge shall proceed no further therein, but another judge shall be assigned to hear 3 such proceeding.” “[A] judge’s prior adverse ruling is not sufficient cause for recusal.” United 4 States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 1986); see also Taylor v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 5 993 F.2d 710, 712 (9th Cir. 1993) (“To warrant recusal, judicial bias must stem from an 6 extrajudicial source.”). 7 The Court has reviewed the instant Motion and agrees with Judge Coughenour’s 8 analysis. Courts, including this one, have routinely rejected Plaintiff’s theory that senior 9 District Judges cannot exercise federal judiciary power. Dkt. #37 at 2 (citing Hoang v. Bank of 10 Am., N.A., 2021 WL 615299, slip op. at 4–5 (W.D. Wash. 2021)). 11 Plaintiff has not otherwise demonstrated a reasonable basis to question Judge 12 Coughenour’s impartiality or to justify recusal. Accordingly, the Court finds and ORDERS 13 that Judge Coughenour’s Minute Order declining to recuse himself, Dkt. #37, is AFFIRMED. 14 DATED this 4th day of April, 2022. 15 A 16 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 17 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24