The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case of Cellspin Soft v. Fitbit regarding the recusal of a district judge, whose financial interests in Google raised questions about impartiality. Cellspin contended that the judge's spouse's financial ties to Google and the judge's own investments warranted recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). They argued that failure to address the recusal based on these financial conflicts violated due process. The case, significant for judicial impartiality standards, remains unresolved following the denial of certiorari.
Cellspin Soft argued that the district judge's financial ties to Google compromised her impartiality, asserting that this bias should have mandated her recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).
In denying certiorari for Cellspin Soft's case against Fitbit, the Supreme Court left unresolved critical questions about judicial recusal related to financial conflicts of interest.
Collection
[
|
...
]