2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 9-17-2008 

# In Re: B e rb ard S . L P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-2964

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " In Re: Be r

b ar d S . L " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 524. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/524HL D- 1 5 1 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 08- 2964

________________ IN R E : B E R N A R D S . L E V I, Pet i t i oner

___________________________________________ O n a Pet i t i on forW r i tof M andamus fr om t he U n ited S tate s D istric t C o u rt f o r th e M id d le D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( R el at ed t o D . C . C i v. N o. 07- cv- 01839)

___________________________________________ Sub mi t t e d Unde rRul e 21 , Fe d. R. A pp . P.

A ugus t29, 2008 B efore: S C IR IC A , C hief J ud ge, A L D ISE R T and G A R T H , C i rcui tJudg es. ( Fi l ed: Sept ember17, 2008)

_________________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

__________________ P E R C U R I A M. B e rn a rd L e v i, a p riso n e r a t th e F e d e ra l C o rre c tio n a l In stitu tio n a t A llen w o o d in W hi t e D eer , Penns y l vani a, as ks t hi s C our tt o i s s ue a w r i tof m andamus t o for ce the dis qu al i fi cat i on of the M agis t rat e Judg e and D i stri ctC ou rtJudg e presi ding ov er hi s case or , i n t he al t ernat i ve, t o t r ans fert he ca s e t o t he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he D i s t r i ctof C ol um bi a.2

M andamus i s a dr as t i c r emedyavai l abl e onl yi n t he mostextr aor di naryof situ ati o n s in resp o n se to an ac t am o u n ti n g to a ju d ici al us u rpa ti o n o f p o w er. I n re N w anze, 242 F . 3d 52 1, 52 4 (3d C i r. 20 01 ). T o just i fysuch a rem edy , a peti t i on er m ust sh o w that h e h as (i) no o ther a d eq u ate m ea n s o f o b tai n ing the d esired reli ef an d (i i) a c le a r a n d in d is p u ta b le ri g h t to is s u a n c e o f th e w ri t. I d . T he M agi s t r at e J udge deni ed Levi ’ s 28 U . S. C . § 455 m ot i on t o r ecus e both t he D i s t r i ctC our tJ udge and hi m s el f. See I n r e School A s bes t os L i t i g. , 977 F. 2d 764, 777- 78 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 2 ) (m a n d a m u s is a p p ro p ria te to c h a llen g e a d e n ial o f a § 4 5 5 m o tio n ). L e v i, how ever , has notal l eged a nyval i d r eas on forr emovi ng ei t hert he M agi s t r at e orD i s t r i ct C our tJ udge. L evi as s er t s onl yt hatt he j udges ar e bi as ed aga i ns thi m beca us e he r eques t ed ( and r ece i ved) fi nanci al di s cl os ur e s t at ement s on bot h j udges . A s evi dence of b i a s , Le v i p o i n t s t o t h e M a g i s t r a t e J u d g e ’ s v a r i o u s ru l i n g s a g a i n s th i m. Th e S u p r e me C our thas s t at ed that“j udi ci al rul i ngs al one al m os tnevercons t i tut e a va l i d bas i s fora bi as orpar t i al i t ym ot i on . . . . [They ] can onl yi n t he r ar es tci r cumst ance s evi dence t he degr ee o f f a v o ri tis m o r a n ta g o n is m re q u ir e d . . . w h e n n o e x tr a ju d ic ia l s o u rc e is in v o lv e d . A l m os ti nvar i abl y , t heyar e pr opergr ounds forappea l , notr ecus al . ” Li t ekyv. U ni t ed S tat es, 51 0 U . S . 5 4 0 , 5 5 5 (19 9 4 ). L evi has al s o notes t abl i s hed thathe has a cl earand i ndi s put abl e r i ghtt o have the cas e hea r d i n t he D i s t r i ctof C ol um bi a. I tappea r s t hatt he pl ai nt i ff a nd atl eas tm os tof the3

defe ndant s r es i de i n Penns y l vani a, and thatt he ac t i ons al l eged i n t he compl ai ntoccurr ed in P en n sy lvan ia. S ee g en era ll y2 8 U . S . C . § 1 3 9 1 (b). A ccor di ngl y , t he mandam us pet i t i on w i l l be deni ed.