In Re Complaint of Judicial
Opinion
Opinion
FOR PUBLICATION
JUDICIAL COUNCIL
OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT
IN RE COMPLAINT No. 08-90241
OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT
ORDER
Filed October 19, 2009
ORDER
KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:
Complainant, a pro se litigant, has filed a hefty misconduct complaint replete with addendums, exhibits, hearing tran- scripts, news articles and sundry other bits of information—a total of over 400 pages. The judge who is the subject of this tome was assigned to complainant’s civil case in district court.
The gist of complainant’s allegations appears to be that the judge has unduly delayed the resolution of her case. But delay is not misconduct “unless the allegation concerns an improper motive in delaying a particular decision or habitual delay in a significant number of unrelated cases.” Judicial-Conduct Rule 3(h)(3)(B). Complainant provides no evidence of improper motive or habitual delay and, in any event, the docket reveals that the judge has ruled on complainant’s 86- page complaint. Because there was no misconduct, no further action is required. See In re Complaint of Judicial Miscon- duct, 567 F.3d 429, 431 (9th Cir. Jud. Council 2009).