The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
13-16010•Michael A. Leon v. State of Arizona;
13-16010Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMar 2, 2015
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MICHAEL A. LEON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF ARIZONA; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 13-16010
D.C. No. 4:12-cv-00556-CKJ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 17, 2015**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Michael A. Leon appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action alleging, among other things, various federal and state law violations in
connection with prior whistleblower litigation against his former employer. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
MAR 2 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 2 --
2 13-16010
district court’s denial of Leon’s motions to recuse the district court judge and for
reconsideration. United States v. Johnson, 610 F.3d 1138, 1147 (9th Cir. 2010)
(denial of a recusal motion); Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or. v. ACandS,
Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993) (denial of motion for reconsideration). We
affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Leon’s motions to
recuse the district court judge and for reconsideration because Leon failed to
establish a basis requiring recusal. See Johnson, 610 F.3d at 1147-48 (grounds for
recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455); Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or., 5 F.3d at
1263 (grounds for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)).
We reject Leon’s argument concerning discovery.
Leon’s request for reasonable accommodation, filed on August 31, 2013, is
denied as unnecessary.
M. Helen Bernstein’s motion to file an amicus brief and request to participate
at oral argument, filed on December 3, 2013, are denied.
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.