District Court, W.D. Washington, 2025

Coleman v. Merritt

Coleman v. Merritt
District Court, W.D. Washington · Decided January 13, 2025
Coleman v. Merritt

Trial Court Opinion

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE TRAVIS CLINTON COLEMAN, CASE NO. C24-1566-JCC-BAT Plaintiff, MINUTE ORDER 11 v. C. MERITT, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C.

16 Coughenour, United States District Judge: 17 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for substitution of judges (Dkt. No. 30), which the Court interprets as a motion to recuse pursuant to LCR 3(f). Having thoroughly considered the motion, and for the reasons described below, the Court DENIES the motion and REFERS the matter to the Chief Judge.

21 A federal judge must “disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” or “[w]here he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding.” 28 24 U.S.C. §§ 455(a), (b)(1). A judge must disqualify under these provisions if “a reasonable person with knowledge of all the facts would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Blixseth v. Yellowstone Mountain Club, LLC, 742 F.3d 1215, 1219 (9th Cir. 2014).

1 “Absent a factual showing of a reasonable basis for questioning his or her impartiality, or allegations of facts establishing other disqualifying circumstances, a judge should participate in cases assigned.” Maier v. Orr, 758 F.2d 1578, 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1985).

4 Plaintiff seeks disqualification primarily because the Court denied his motion for appointed counsel. (See Dkt. No. 30 at 1) (“I am being treated unfairly by the [C]ourt and I want a different judge.”) While Plaintiff may disagree with the Court’s rulings, this is not a basis for disqualification because of impartiality, personal prejudice, or any of the provisions under 28 8 U.S.C. §§ 455(a) or (b). The motion presents insufficient grounds to warrant recusal. See Maier, 758 F.2d at 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1985).

10 Accordingly, the Honorable John C. Coughenour, U.S. District Judge, DECLINES to voluntarily recuse and REFERS the motion to Chief Judge under LCR 3(f) for further consideration.

14 DATED this 13th day January 2025.

Ravi Subramanian Clerk of Court s/Martin Valencia 18 Deputy Clerk

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.