FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AGNES SUEVER, deceased;  MADONNA SUEVER; STEVE TUCKER; ALEXANDER VONDJIDIS; RICHARD W.

SEITZINGER; JO-ANN SEITZINGER, individually and as trustees for the Seitzinger Family Trust; JOHNSTONE WHITLEY; TONY LEE; LYNN KEITH, on behalf of themselves as individuals and as taxpayers on behalf of other persons similarly situated, No. 10-17127 Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. v. 5:03-CV-00156-RS KATHLEEN CONNELL, in her  Northern District of individual capacity as former State California, Controller of the State of San Jose California; RICHARD CHIVARO, in ORDER his individual and official capacity; GEORGE DELEON, in his individual and official capacity; STEVE WESTLY, in his individual and official capacity as Controller of the State of California, and its custodial capacity as administrator for the Unclaimed Property Fund; JOHN CHIANG, Defendants-Appellees.  Filed June 4, 2012 Order by Judge D.W. Nelson

6567 6568 SUEVER v. CONNELL ORDER D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judge: After this matter was assigned to me, I determined in the course of pre-argument preparation that I appear to be a mem- ber of the putative plaintiff class, though it is as yet uncerti- fied, as I own property that appears in the California State Controller’s database of unclaimed property.

A fellow judge of this Court recently confronted a similar situation, though in that case the judge appeared to be a mem- ber of the certified class. At any rate, the judge concluded that her “decision not to recuse is authorized by [28 U.S.C.] § 455(f), strikes the appropriate balance between securing the interests of impartiality and its appearance and reducing the practical costs that unnecessary recusal entails, and does not diminish public respect for the judiciary.” Stern v. Gambello, 2012 WL 1583305 (9th Cir. May 4, 2012) (quoting In re Lit- erary Works in Elec. Databases Copyright Litig., 509 F.3d 136, 144 (2d Cir. 2007)). In accordance with § 455(f), the judge announced that she would forego any financial interest in the class settlement or in any future settlement or adjudica- tion. Id. I have considered whether I should recuse myself from this case because of the possibility of class membership. However, after reviewing the analysis in Stern and In re Literary Works, I believe recusal in this case would be inappropriate, espe- cially given that the class is not yet certified. I therefore will not recuse, but rather announce that I will forego any financial interest in this putative class and will not accept any payments due myself as a member of the putative class.

PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS—SAN FRANCISCO The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2012 Thomson Reuters.