Edwards v. City of Albuquerque, 1:25-cv-00517

Pro se plaintiff Stephen S. Edwards filed a complaint alleging deficiencies in the actions of the City of Albuquerque, Justin Robbs, and the Second Judicial District Court.
The district court identified shortcomings in Edwards’s complaint related to both jurisdiction and adequacy of stated claims.
The court ordered Edwards to either show cause why the case should not be dismissed or file an amended complaint.
In response, Edwards moved to disqualify the presiding magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), claiming bias or appearance of impropriety.
Edwards also requested a hearing for the judge to explain the basis for court-identified deficiencies and procedural conduct.
The court denied the motion for disqualification and the request for a hearing, and reiterated the order for Edwards to show cause or amend by June 25, 2025.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Disqualification of Judge	Judge's impartiality in question due to actions	No evidence for reasonable doubt	Motion denied
Adequacy of Order to Show Cause	Judge acted improperly by raising issues sua sponte	Judge has duty to identify deficiencies	Judge’s authority upheld
Need for Hearing on Court’s Rulings	Hearing needed to clarify the judge’s reasoning	Not necessary—rulings on the record	Hearing request denied
Sufficiency of Jurisdictional Facts	Facts should be taken as pled by plaintiff	Plaintiff must plead jurisdictional facts	Plaintiff must show jurisdiction

United States v. Wells, 873 F.3d 1241 (10th Cir. 2017) (standard for recusal—must be more than unsubstantiated suggestion of bias)
United States v. Cooley, 1 F.3d 985 (10th Cir. 1993) (objective standard for judicial impartiality)
Mathis v. Huff & Puff Trucking, Inc., 787 F.3d 1297 (10th Cir. 2015) (recusal based on reasonable observer, not hypersensitive perceptions)
Dutcher v. Matheson, 733 F.3d 980 (10th Cir. 2013) (burden on the party invoking federal jurisdiction to allege sufficient facts)