Jones

Jones v. Johnson

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 20203:19-cv-07944California191 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CHARLES B. JONES, Case No. 19-cv-07944-EMC Petitioner,

ORDER

v. Docket No. 11 R. C. JOHNSON, Respondent. a

Petitioner has filed a motion for a statement of reasons why Judge Koh disqualified herself

v || from this action. Petitioner’s motion is DENIED. Docket No. 11. “Judges are ‘under no

|| obligation to provide a statement of reasons for recusal,’ and typically do not make any record G16 || when, as here, they recuse themselves sua sponte.” United States v. Casas, 376 F.3d 20, 23 (1st

= Cir.2004) (citation omitted); see also Hampton v. City of Chicago, 643 F.2d 478, 480 (7th

Cir.1981) (same). Judge Koh issued only one order in this case: the order recusing herself. She || was not obliged to explain why she recused herself in this action, nor will the undersigned request 20 || her to do so now. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: February 13, 2020 LL…

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.