Brisbon

MEMORANDUM *

Brisbon and McMahon appeal the judgment of the district court entered against them after a bench trial on their claims filed pursuant to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 , et seq. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we will not recount it here.

I

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ assertions, there is nothing in the record to indicate that a new trial is warranted because of judicial bias. There is no evidence of extrajudicial bias. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 554-555 , 114 S.Ct. 1147 , 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994) (explaining bias for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 455 (a)). Rather, the plaintiffs primarily rely on the fact that they received unfavorable rulings and their belief that the judge was not receptive to their claims. The record does not support a conclusion that *578 the judge’s comments, questions, or conclusions demonstrated actual bias warranting a new trial. United States v. Mostella, 802 F.2d 358, 361 (9th Cir.1986).

II

The district court did not err in its determinations on standing. To satisfy the constitutional requirements for standing, a plaintiff must…