Celli v. New York City, 1:24-cv-09743

Plaintiff Lucio Celli filed a motion seeking the recusal or disqualification of Judge John P. Cronan in ongoing federal civil litigation.
The request for recusal was based on alleged impartiality or appearance of bias by the presiding judge.
Plaintiff also sought a two-week extension to file objections to a recent Report and Recommendation and to respond to an Order to Show Cause regarding a possible filing injunction.
The Court reviewed the motion under the standards set by 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) and relevant Second Circuit case law.
The judge denied the recusal motion, finding no reasonable basis for doubting his impartiality.
The judge granted the plaintiff's procedural extension but warned against continued frivolous filings and possible sanctions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Judicial recusal	Judge's impartiality reasonably questioned	No basis for recusal shown	Denied: No reasonable basis for doubt
Extension of deadlines	Needs more time to respond/prepare objections	Contested or silent	Granted: Extension until June 24
Filing injunction	Not directly argued here	Court notes abusive filings	Warning: Further abuse may mean sanctions

Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (appearance of bias is enough to warrant recusal if a reasonable observer would doubt impartiality)
United States v. Yousef, 327 F.3d 56 (standard for judicial recusal is whether an objective observer would question impartiality)
In re Int’l Bus. Machs. Corp., 618 F.2d 923 (recusal should not be granted lightly due to wasted resources)
In re Drexel Burnham Lambert, Inc., 861 F.2d 1307 (judges have a duty not to recuse without valid grounds)