Pontier

facts would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir.1986) (quotation omitted). Ordinarily, the alleged bias must stem from an 6 “extrajudicial source.” Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 554-56, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1157, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994). “[J]udicial rulings alone almost never constitute valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.” Id. “[O]pinions 8 formed by the judge on the basis of facts introduced or events occurring in the course of the current proceedings, or of prior proceedings, do not constitute a basis for a bias or partiality motion unless they display a deep-seated 10 favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible.” Id. 11 United States v. Hernandez, 109 F.3d 1450, 1453–54 (9th Cir. 1997). The Court finds Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that “a reasonable person with knowledge of all the facts would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Id. at 1453 (citation omitted). The undersigned’s bar membership alone does not warrant recusal. See…