Summary
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied Sergey Firsov’s motion to disqualify the assigned magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 455. The court held that its orders managing the docket and striking unauthorized filings did not establish bias or create a reasonable question regarding the judge’s impartiality.
Holdings
- Disqualification was not required because the court's case-management orders and rulings did not provide a reasonable factual basis to question the judge's impartiality or establish wrongful bias against Plaintiff.
- Rule 15(a) did not permit Plaintiff to file a second amendment as a matter of course because Plaintiff had already amended his complaint; a further amendment required the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave, and the motion for leave itself was subject to the court's order requiring prior leave to file new motions.
Questions Presented
- Whether the magistrate judge was required to disqualify herself under 28 U.S.C. § 455 based on alleged bias and the order striking Plaintiff's unauthorized motion for leave to amend.
- Whether Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint was improperly struck because Rule 15(a) permitted amendment without court permission.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (5)
- United States v. Holland, 519 F.3d 909, 913 (9th Cir. 2008)(followed)
- United States v. Holland, 519 F.3d 909, 913-14 (9th Cir. 2008)(followed)
- Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 548, 550 (1994)(followed)
- Dietz v. Bouldin, 579 U.S. 40 (2016)(followed)
- Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…