In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 10654

A pro se litigant filed a complaint against a magistrate judge and a district judge alleging unlawful dismissal of multiple civil cases and that rulings were rubber-stamped.
The complainant asserted bias and conspiracy because judges allegedly never adjudicated against defendants and routinely dismissed pro se § 1983 complaints.
The court held that adverse rulings and outcomes, without more, do not prove bias or conspiracy and that the allegations were about merits, not misconduct.
The complainant claimed improper assignment of judges and forced assignment to particular judges, but there was no evidence of improper motive or involvement by the judges in case assignment.
Additional allegations included a doctored motion, open legal advice, and intimidation; the court found no evidence of misconduct after reviewing exhibits.
The complainant urged transcripts be ordered to substantiate misconduct; the court deemed the request vague and a fishing expedition, lacking specific proof.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Merits-based rulings as misconduct	Rulings unlawfully dismissed and were rubber-stamped.	Allegations concern merits, not misconduct.	Merits-based allegations dismissed.
Bias or conspiracy from adverse rulings	Judges are corrupt due to outcomes against him.	Adverse rulings do not prove bias or conspiracy; no evidence provided.	Claims dismissed for lack of evidence.
Improper case assignment or selection of judges	Complainant was forced onto judges; same judge presided repeatedly with improper motive.	No right to a particular procedure; no evidence of involvement or improper motive by judges.	Dismissed for lack of evidence of misconduct in assignment.
Other misconduct allegations (doctored documents, intimidation)	Documents were manipulated; judges provided intimidating legal advice.	Exhibits show no improper conduct.	Dismissed for lack of supporting evidence.
Request for transcripts as basis for misconduct	Transcripts would reveal substantial misconduct if obtained.	Request is vague and a fishing expedition; no specific misconduct identified.	Dismissed as vague and unsupported.

In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 685 F.2d 1226 (9th Cir. 1982) (misconduct claims about merits require dismissal)
In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 583 F.3d 598 (9th Cir. 2009) (adverse rulings do not prove bias)
Cruz v. Abbate, 812 F.2d 571 (9th Cir. 1987) (no right to a particular procedure for judge selection)
In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 632 F.3d 1287 (9th Cir. 2011) (lack of evidence supports misconduct claims)
In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 630 F.3d 968 (9th Cir. 2010) (no evidence of misconduct after review)
In re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 584 F.3d 1230 (9th Cir. 2009) (vague accusations and lack of objective evidence)