Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03131/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03131-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FAREED SEPEHRY-FARD,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPARTMENT STORES NATIONAL 

BANK, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-03131-WHO 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

RECONSIDERATION; DENYING 

MOTION TO FACILITATE GRAND 

JURY INVESTIGATION; DENYING 

CONTINGENT MOTION FOR 

DISQUALIFICATION

Re: Dkt. Nos. 76, 77, 78

Currently before the Court are plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the Court’s 

December 13, 2013 Order granting defendants’ motions to dismiss, plaintiff’s motion to have the 

Court facilitate a grand jury investigation and plaintiff’s contingent motion for disqualification. 

The Court DENIES the motion for reconsideration. Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure provides for reconsideration of a court order where one or more of the following 

is shown: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence 

that by due diligence could not have been discovered before the court’s decision; (3) fraud by the 

adverse party; (4) voiding of the judgment; (5) satisfaction of the judgment; (6) any other reason 

justifying relief. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b); School Dist. 1J v. ACandS Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th 

Cir.1993). Although couched in broad terms, subparagraph (6) requires a showing that the 

grounds justifying relief are extraordinary. Twentieth Century–Fox Film Corp. v. Dunnahoo, 637 

F.2d 1338, 1341 (9th Cir.1981). Having reviewed plaintiff’s motion, the Court finds there is no 

basis to reconsider the Order dismissing plaintiff’s claims against the Financial Entities, the 

Attorney Defendants, and Sheriff Baca and denying plaintiff’s motions. See Docket No. 74. 

Plaintiff does not raise new arguments or submit newly discovered evidence, but simply argues 

Case 3:13-cv-03131-WHO Document 82 Filed 01/07/14 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

that the Court was wrong.

The Court DENIES the motion to facilitate a grand jury investigation. The only authority 

plaintiff cites to support his request is California Rule of Court 7.10. That rule, however, governs 

ex parte communications in proceedings under the California Probate Code and discusses when

state courts may refer such communications to other entities for investigation. That rule has no 

applicability to proceedings in this Court and does not authorize this Court to “facilitate” a grand 

jury investigation into the conduct of the defendants in this case.

The Court DENIES the contingent motion for disqualification. According to plaintiff, the 

motion is contingent as it will only “kick in” if the Court does not award plaintiff the damages he 

seeks. Docket No. 77 at 2. The sole basis for the motion is plaintiff’s disagreement with the 

Court’s prior orders and the Court’s alleged ignoring evidence of wrongdoing by defendants. 

Complaints about and disagreement with the conclusions the Court reached in its prior orders 

cannot support a claim of bias or prejudice to warrant disqualification or recusal. See, e.g., United 

States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 1986) (“The alleged prejudice must result from an 

extrajudicial source; a judge’s prior adverse ruling is not sufficient cause for recusal.”).

Plaintiff’s motions for reconsideration, to facilitate a grand jury investigation, and to 

recuse are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 7, 2014

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-03131-WHO Document 82 Filed 01/07/14 Page 2 of 2