United States Seventh Circuit

In plaintiff's suit against Google and 47 other defendants for trademark infringement, related to Google's Android operating system for mobile phones, plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandamus, claiming that the district judge's denial of his motion to add AT&T as a defendant created an appearance of impropriety because the judge's wife is a member of AT&T's board of directors, is denied where: 1) section 455(b)(5)(i) does not disqualify the judge, because it applies only to the relation between a judge and a party, and AT&T Mobility is not a "party" to this case; 2) section 455(b)(4) does not require the judge's recusal because AT&T Mobility is not a "party," and it would not be possible to say that either the judge or his wife has a "financial interest" in the controversy; and 3) although the judge in this case should not have acted on the motion to add AT&T Mobility as a defendant, the judge's failure to refer the motion to another judge was inconsequential.

Appellate Information

• Argued 08/23/2010
• Decided 09/08/2010
• Published 09/08/2010

Judges

• EASTERBROOK

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel