Court Opinion

ID: 9960588
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-16 17:00:46.416384+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:43.188368
License: Public Domain

FOR PUBLICATION

              JUDICIAL COUNCIL
             OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-90122
IN RE COMPLAINT OF
JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT                             ORDER

                    Filed April 16, 2024

                          ORDER

MURGUIA, Chief Judge:

    Complainant, a pro se litigant, has filed a complaint of
judicial misconduct against a district judge. Review of this
complaint is governed by the Rules for Judicial Conduct and
Judicial-Disability Proceedings (“Judicial-Conduct Rules”),
the federal statutes addressing judicial conduct and
disability, 28 U.S.C. § 351 et seq., and relevant prior
decisions of the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council. In
accordance with these authorities, the names of complainant
and the subject judge shall not be disclosed in this order. See
Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(g)(2).
2          IN RE: COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

    The Judicial Conduct and Disability Act provides a
remedy if a federal judge “has engaged in conduct
prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of
the business of the courts.” 28 U.S.C. § 351(a). A chief
judge may dismiss a complaint if, following review, he or
she finds it is not cognizable under the statute, is directly
related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling, or is
frivolous or lacks sufficient evidence to raise an inference of
misconduct. See 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(1)(A)(i)-(iii). Judicial
misconduct proceedings are not a substitute for the normal
appellate review process, and may not be used to seek
reversal of a judge’s decision, to obtain a new trial, or to
request reassignment to a different judge.
     Complainant alleges that the district judge should have
recused himself for two reasons. First, complainant
previously filed a civil lawsuit against this judge, which was
dismissed in 2019. Second, complainant previously filed a
judicial misconduct complaint against this judge, which was
dismissed in 2020. Complainant alleges that the district
judge was biased against him and unable to remain impartial,
in light of these earlier filings.
    The Committee on Codes of Conduct has published
guidance regarding recusal considerations when a litigant
has filed lawsuits or judicial misconduct complaints against
the judge presiding over their case. See Comm. on Codes of
Conduct, Advisory Opinion No. 103 (2009).                The
Committee cautioned against automatic recusal, which may
“encourage litigants to manipulate and abuse the judicial
process,” but also noted that a “universal refusal to recuse”
may negatively impact “public confidence in the integrity of
the judicial process.” Id. The Committee concluded that
when a lawsuit against the judge is promptly dismissed on
judicial immunity grounds, the judge’s impartiality in an
           IN RE: COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT           3

unrelated filing by the same litigant cannot be reasonably
questioned. Id. Here, the prior civil lawsuit against the
district judge was promptly dismissed on judicial immunity
grounds, and had concluded years before complainant filed
an unrelated case before the same judge. On these facts,
there is no basis for concluding that the district judge’s
impartiality was compromised and this allegation is
dismissed as unfounded. See 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(1)(A)(iii)
(listing reasons the chief judge may decide to dismiss the
complaint, including claims that are lacking sufficient
evidence to raise an inference that misconduct has occurred);
Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(D).
   Similarly, the Committee concluded that after a judicial
misconduct complaint is dismissed, “no reasonable person
would then question the ability of the judge to participate
impartially in the complaining litigant’s case.” Advisory
Opinion No. 103. Here, the prior complaint for judicial
misconduct was dismissed more than two years before
complainant filed another federal lawsuit before the same
judge. Because there is no basis to question the district
judge’s impartiality, this allegation is dismissed as
unfounded. See 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(1)(A)(iii); Judicial-
Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(D).
     Finally, complainant alleges that the district judge is
“unfit for the bench” because he “can’t comprehend” the
substance of complainant’s filing. A review of the relevant
dockets demonstrates that complainant has a long history of
using the federal courts to attempt to relitigate a state court
matter, which was settled many years ago. The fact that the
district judge recognized the filing as another attempt to
relitigate a settled matter is no challenge to his fitness.
Because complainant has failed to show that the judge is
“unable to discharge [his] duties” or “to function
4         IN RE: COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

effectively,” this allegation is dismissed as baseless and
unfounded. See Judicial-Conduct Rule 4(c).
    DISMISSED.