Michael Turney v. DOJ

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 19 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MICHAEL ROY TURNEY, No. 19-16377
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:19-cv-02724-SRB-DMF
v.
MEMORANDUM*
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 12, 2021**
Before: TALLMAN, RAWLINSON, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.
Former federal prisoner Michael Roy Turney appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named
Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging
constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d
1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Turney’s action because Turney failed
to name proper defendants. See Correctional Servs. Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U.S.
61, 63 (2001) (explaining that a Bivens action is not available against private
companies); FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 484-86 (1994) (explaining that a Bivens
action is only available against federal officers, not federal agencies).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Turney’s motion to
recuse District Judge Bolton because Turney failed to demonstrate that a
reasonable person would believe that Judge Bolton’s impartiality could be
questioned. See United States v. Hernandez, 109 F.3d 1450, 1453 (9th Cir. 1997)
(setting forth standard of review and discussing standard for recusal under 28
U.S.C. §§ 144 and 455).
We reject as unsupported by the record Turney’s contention that Judge
Bolton engaged in misconduct.
AFFIRMED.
2 19-16377