1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHARLES CHITAT NG, Case No. 18-cv-00763-WHO (PR)

Plaintiff, 8 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO v. 9 DISQUALIFY

10 J. RUSSELL, et al., 11 Defendants. Dkt. No. 107

12 13 Plaintiff Ng has filed a motion to disqualify me from presiding over his suit. He 14 makes no specific allegations against me, but rather declares in a conclusory fashion that 15 “this judge has demonstrated biased [sic] against Plaintiff” and asks that “this case be 16 reassigned to another judge in the interest of justice.” (Mot. to Disqualify, Dkt. No. 107 at 17 1.) 18 Motions to disqualify fall under two statutory provisions,

and 19

. Section 144 provides for recusal where a party files a timely and 20 sufficient affidavit averring that the judge before whom the matter is pending has a 21 personal bias or prejudice either against the party or in favor of an adverse party, and 22 setting forth the facts and reasons for such belief. See

. Similarly, section 23 455 requires a judge to disqualify himself “in any proceeding in which his impartiality 24 might reasonably be questioned,”

(a), including where the judge “has a 25 personal bias or prejudice concerning a party,”

§ 455(b)(1). 26 A judge finding a section 144 motion timely and the affidavits legally sufficient 27 must proceed no further and another judge must be assigned to hear the matter. United 1 || sufficient, however, the judge at whom the motion is directed may determine the matter. 2 || See id. at 868 (holding judge challenged under section 144 properly heard and denied 3 || motion where affidavit not legally sufficient). 4 The substantive test for personal bias or prejudice is identical under sections 144 5 || and 455. See Sibla, 624 F.2d at 868. Specifically, under both statutes recusal is 6 || appropriate where “a reasonable person with knowledge of all the facts would conclude 7 || that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Yagman v. Republic Ins., 8 ||

(9th Cir. 1993) (citation omitted). Consequently, an affidavit filed 9 || under section 144 will raise a question concerning recusal under sections 455(a) and (b)(1) 10 as well. Sibla, 624 F.2d at 867. 11 Ng’s motion to disqualify me is DENIED. His conclusory allegations fail to 2 provide any fact or reason on which a reasonable person would conclude that my 5 13 || impartiality might reasonably be questioned, or that otherwise indicate any bias or 14 || prejudice. 15 The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions. a 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 || Dated: July 13, 2022

19 United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28