Old Carco LLC and RJM I, LLC, as Liquidation Trustee for Old Carco L

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 	NOT FOR PUBLICATION
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
____________________________________
:
In re 	: 	Chapter 11
:
Old Carco LLC 	: 	Case No. 09 B 50002 (AJG)
(f/k/a Chrysler LLC), et al., 	:
Debtors. 	: 	(Jointly Administered)
:
____________________________________:
ORDER AND OPINION REGARDING VARIOUS MOTIONS FILED BY
JONATHAN LEE RICHES
On June 4, 2009, Jonathan Lee Riches (“Movant”) filed a Motion for Change of
Venue presumably pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1408 and a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 455(a)(b)(c), asserting Judge Gonzalez should recuse himself due to personal
and financial conflicts of interest resulting from Judge Gonzalez’s previous use of and
investment in Canadian National Railway, a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy
proceedings.1 Movant concludes that a strong appearance of partiality is created as a
result of these circumstances and therefore recusal is required.
On June 4, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c), asserting Judge Gonzalez should recuse himself due to a personal conflict of
interest since Judge Gonzalez and various family members own products manufactured
by Dell Inc., a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings, and therefore have a
financial interest in the outcome of this case. Movant further asserts that Judge Gonzalez
has a personal relationship with Michael Dell, Chief Executive Officer of Dell Inc.
1 In his motion papers, Movant identifies certain entities as parties that the Court has not verified are
actually parties in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings. Therefore, the Court’s use of the term ”party”
referencing any of the entities identified by the Movant is not a finding by the Court as to their status as a
party in the case. However, verification of these parties’ status in the case is not necessary for the purposes
of ruling on the motions presently before the Court.
09-50002-mg Doc 4945 Filed 07/31/09 Entered 07/31/09 14:17:46 Main Document
Pg 1 of 7

2
Movant concludes that a strong appearance of partiality is created as a result of these
circumstances and therefore recusal is required.
On June 5, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c), asserting Judge Gonzalez should recuse himself. Movant asserts that newly
discovered evidence establishes Judge Gonzalez’s past financial dealings with Honeywell
International, a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings. Movant concludes that a
strong appearance of partiality is created as a result of this evidence and therefore recusal
is required.
On June 6, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c) and the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, asserting Judge Gonzalez
should recuse himself due to his previous and current business dealings with Mitsubishi
Motors North America, Inc., a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings. Movant
alleges this conflict of interest arises because Judge Gonzalez and members of his family
own cars manufactured by Mitsubishi, and therefore have a financial interest in the
outcome of these proceedings. Movant concludes that a strong appearance of partiality is
created as a result of these circumstances and therefore recusal is required.
On June 6, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c), asserting that Judge Gonzalez should recuse himself due to a personal
conflict of interest with North American Fuel Systems, a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy
proceedings. Movant alleges that this conflict of interest arises due to the fact that
various family members of Judge Gonzalez were previously employed by and engaged in
financial dealings with North American Fuel Systems. Movant concludes that a strong
09-50002-mg Doc 4945 Filed 07/31/09 Entered 07/31/09 14:17:46 Main Document
Pg 2 of 7

3
appearance of partiality is created as a result of these circumstances and therefore recusal
is required.
On June 7, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Counsel presumably pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) stating he is entitled to legal counsel as an imprisoned litigant who is
unable to represent himself effectively in a court of law.
On June 7, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c) seeking to present evidence establishing the existence of a personal and
financial conflict of interest between Judge Gonzalez and the Office of the U.S. Trustee.
Movant concludes that a strong appearance of partiality is created as a result of this
evidence and therefore recusal is required.
On June 8, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c) and the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, asserting Judge Gonzalez
should recuse himself due to personal and financial conflicts of interest and personal bias
against the Movant. Movant asserts that Judge Gonzalez holds a “grudge” against him
and therefore Judge Gonzalez cannot preside impartially over these proceedings (ECF
No. 4067). Further, Movant asserts that a conflict of interest arises due to the fact that
Judge Gonzalez and various members of his family have either worked for, been engaged
in business dealings with, or owned cars manufactured by Chrysler LLC. Movant
concludes that a strong appearance of partiality is created as a result of these
circumstances and therefore recusal is required.
On June 8, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c), asserting Judge Gonzalez should recuse himself due to personal and
financial conflicts of interest. Movant asserts that Judge Gonzalez donates to the
09-50002-mg Doc 4945 Filed 07/31/09 Entered 07/31/09 14:17:46 Main Document
Pg 3 of 7

4
Michigan Workers’ Compensation Agency, a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy
proceedings, and also asserts that the Judge has a personal relationship with Sally M.
Henry, attorney for the Michigan Workers’ Compensation Agency. Movant concludes
that a strong appearance of partiality is created as a result of these circumstances and
therefore recusal is required. Movant also moves to correct a clerical error that omitted
the notation of “a/k/a Madoff” alongside Movant’s name in previously filed court
documents.
On June 8, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c) and the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, asserting Judge Gonzalez
should recuse himself due to a personal conflict of interest. In support of this motion,
Movant seeks to present evidence establishing that both Judge Gonzalez and Round Rock
ISD, a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings, own stock in General Motors and
Ford Motor Company and therefore have a financial interest in the outcome of these
proceedings. Movant concludes that a strong appearance of partiality is created as a
result of this evidence and therefore recusal is required.
On June 8, 2009, Movant filed a Motion to Object in opposition to Horton Inc.’s
participation as a party in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings. Movant asserts that a
conflict of interest exists due to the fact that Horton Inc. has engaged in previous business
dealings with Judge Gonzalez. Movant concludes that a strong appearance of partiality is
created as a result of these circumstances and therefore Horton Inc. should not be
permitted to participate as a party in the proceedings before Judge Gonzalez.
On June 8, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c), asserting Judge Gonzalez should recuse himself due to a financial conflict
09-50002-mg Doc 4945 Filed 07/31/09 Entered 07/31/09 14:17:46 Main Document
Pg 4 of 7

5
of interest. Movant asserts that a conflict of interest exists due to the fact that Horton,
Inc. engaged in previous business dealings with Judge Gonzalez. Movant concludes that
a strong appearance of partiality is created as a result of these circumstances and
therefore recusal is required.
On June 9, 2009, Movant filed a Motion for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
455(a)(b)(c), asserting Judge Gonzalez should recuse himself due to personal and
financial conflicts of interest regarding International Automotive Components (“IAC”), a
party in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings. In support of this motion, Movant seeks to
present evidence establishing Judge Gonzalez’s personal affiliation with IAC and
financial interest in the outcome of these proceedings. Movant concludes that a strong
appearance of partiality is created as a result of this evidence and therefore recusal is
required.
Further, Movant submitted multiple requests seeking access to Judge Gonzalez’s
financial disclosure forms presumably pursuant to section 105 of the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. app. §105) to investigate additional financial conflicts
of interest among the parties involved in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings.
As to the factual allegations asserted regarding Judge Gonzalez’s connection with
any above-referenced party, with the exception that a family member owns a Dell
product, none of the allegations is accurate.
CONCLUSION
Upon reviewing the allegations presented, the Court finds that Movant has not
established a sufficient factual or legal basis for any of the relief sought. As a result,
Movant’s arguments are meritless and any relief sought is denied.
09-50002-mg Doc 4945 Filed 07/31/09 Entered 07/31/09 14:17:46 Main Document
Pg 5 of 7

6
Movant’s burden in the Motion for Change of Venue presumably pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1408 was to demonstrate that a change of venue is necessary in the interest of
justice. After reviewing the allegations presented, the Court finds that Movant has not
established a sufficient factual or legal basis upon which it may be concluded that this
court is an improper venue in which the interests of justice will not be served.
Movant’s burden in the Motions for Recusal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)(b)(c)
was to demonstrate that a reasonable person with knowledge of all the facts of the case
would question Judge Gonzalez’s impartiality and perceive a significant risk that Judge
Gonzalez would resolve the case on a basis other than the merits. After reviewing the
allegations presented, the Court finds no sufficient factual or legal basis for the relief
sought.
With respect to Movant’s Motion for Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1),
Movant has failed to establish a sufficient factual or legal basis upon which the court may
exercise discretion to grant the relief requested.
With respect to Movant’s request for access to Judge Gonzalez’s financial
disclosure forms presumably pursuant to section 105 of the Ethics in Government Act of
1978 (5 U.S.C. app. §105), such requests should be submitted to the Office of the
Committee on Financial Disclosure, located at the Administrative Office of the U.S.
Courts, Suite 231, One Columbus Circle, NE, Washington, D.C. 20544. Movant’s
request for access to these documents is therefore denied, without prejudice, for failure to
comport with proper procedure regarding requests of this nature.
Accordingly, it is hereby
09-50002-mg Doc 4945 Filed 07/31/09 Entered 07/31/09 14:17:46 Main Document
Pg 6 of 7

7
ORDERED, Movant’s request for Change of Venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1408
is denied; and it is further
ORDERED, Movant’s requests for Judge Gonzalez’s recusal pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 455(a)(b)(c) is denied; and it is further
ORDERED, Movant’s request for counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) is
denied; and it is further
ORDERED, Movant’s request for access to Judge Gonzalez’s financial disclosure
forms pursuant to section 105 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. app.
§105) is denied without prejudice to seek such information in accordance with the above-
referenced procedure.
Dated: New York, New York
July 31, 2009
s/Arthur J. Gonzalez
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
09-50002-mg Doc 4945 Filed 07/31/09 Entered 07/31/09 14:17:46 Main Document
Pg 7 of 7