Perez v. KIPP DC Supporting Corp., et al.

Perez · United States District Court for the District of Columbia · December 10, 2025 · No. 21-929 (RC)

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia denied Shanique Perez’s motions seeking recusal of Judge Rudolph Contreras and reassignment of the case to Chief Judge James E. Boasberg. The court held that Perez’s allegations concerning the judge’s prior employment and rulings did not establish statutory or constitutional grounds for disqualification under 28 U.S.C. § 455. The court also concluded that reassignment was unwarranted because the case was related to Perez’s earlier action and Perez had not timely objected to the reassignment.

Holdings

  1. Recusal was not required because Perez did not show that an extrajudicial source created an appearance of partiality or that the judge had deep-seated favoritism or antagonism making fair judgment impossible. Prior employment at the same United States Attorney's Office, without a close relationship or involvement in the case, did not provide an objectively reasonable basis to question impartiality.
  2. Recusal was not required under § 455(b)(1) because Perez did not establish actual bias or prejudice based on an extrajudicial source.
  3. Reassignment to Chief Judge Boasberg was properly denied because the action was related to Perez's earlier case: the cases involved the same parties and substantially the same subject matter, and the later-numbered case had properly been transferred for reassignment.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district judge was required to recuse himself under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) because of prior employment at the United States Attorney's Office and alleged relationships with defense counsel.
  2. Whether the district judge was required to recuse himself under 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(1) based on alleged personal bias or prejudice.
  3. Whether the case should be reassigned to Chief Judge Boasberg under Local Civil Rule 40.5 because it was related to Perez's earlier action.
  4. Whether Perez's failure to object to the reassignment and related-case designation barred her later reassignment request.

Disposition

denied

Cases Cited (17)

  • Doe v. KIPP DC Supporting Corp., 373 F. Supp. 3d 1, 5–6, 15 (D.D.C. 2019)(cited)
  • Perez v. KIPP DC Supporting Corp., 590 F. Supp. 3d 150, 155–56, 164 (D.D.C. 2022)(cited)
  • Perez v. KIPP DC Supporting Corp., 70 F.4th 570, 572–73 (D.C. Cir. 2023)(cited)
  • Perez v. KIPP DC Supporting Corp., No. 21-cv-929, 2024 WL 3534769, at *14 (D.D.C. July 25, 2024)(cited)
  • United States v. Microsoft Corp., 253 F.3d 34, 111–15 (D.C. Cir. 2001)(cited)
  • Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868, 876–77 (2009)(cited)
  • United States v. Haldeman, 559 F.2d 31, 134 (D.C. Cir. 1976) (per curiam)(cited)
  • Tripp v. Exec. Off. of the President, 104 F. Supp. 2d 30, 34 (D.D.C. 2000)(cited)
  • Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994)(cited)
  • Karim-Panahi v. U.S. Cong., 105 F. App'x 270, 275 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (per curiam)(cited)

Showing top 10 of 17.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…