Gomez

(PC) Merino v. Gomez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 28, 20232:21-cv-00572California1,008 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FRANCISCO MERINO, No. 2: 21-cv-0572 DAD KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER GOMEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Several matters are pending before the court. Plaintiff’s Motion for Recusal (ECF No. 168) Plaintiff moves for recusal of the undersigned. A judge must disqualify himself if “his impartiality might be reasonably questioned,” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), or if “he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding,” 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(1). “[J]udicial rulings alone almost never constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.” Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994). Judicial bias or prejudice formed during current or prior proceedings is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.