10-17127 | 9th Cir. | Jun 4, 2012
D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judge:
After this matter was assigned to me, I determined in the course of pre- argument preparation that I appear to be a member of the putative plaintiff class, though it is as yet uncertified, as I own property that appears in the California State Controller’s database of unclaimed property.
A fellow judge of this Court recently confronted a similar situation, though in that case the judge appeared to be a member of the certified class. At any rate, the judge concluded that her “decision not to recuse is authorized by [28 U.S.C.] § 455(f), strikes the appropriate balance between securing the interests of impartiality and its appearance and reducing the practical costs that unnecessary recusal entails, and does not diminish public respect for the judiciary.” Stern v. Gambello , 2012 WL 1583305" date_filed="2012-05-04" court="9th Cir." case_name="Stern v. Gambello">2012 WL 1583305 (9th Cir. May 4, 2012) (quoting In re Literary Works in Elec. Databases Copyright Litig. , 509 F.3d 136" date_filed="2007-11-29" court="2d Cir." case_name="In Re Literary Works in Elec. Databases Copyright Litigation">509 F.3d 136, 144 (2d Cir. 2007)). In accordance with § 455(f), the judge announced that she would forego any financial interest in the class settlement or in any future settlement or adjudication. Id.
I have considered whether I should recuse myself from this case because of the possibility of class membership. However, after reviewing the analysis in Stern and In re Literary Works , I believe recusal in this case would be inappropriate, especially given that the class is not yet certified. I therefore will not recuse, but rather announce that I will forego any financial interest in this putative class and will not accept any payments due myself as a member of the putative class.