Bykov v. Eacceleration Corp.
Docket: No. 06-36073
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; November 25, 2007; Federal Appellate Court
Vladik Bykov appeals pro se from the district court's orders denying his motions to reopen his Americans with Disabilities Act case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) and to remove the presiding judge. The appellate jurisdiction is established under 28 U.S.C. 1291, with a standard of review for abuse of discretion. The court affirms the district court's decisions. The motion to remove Judge Leighton was denied because it was based solely on the judge's alleged improper discovery orders, which do not typically support claims of bias or partiality. The motion to reopen the case was also denied, as Bykov had stipulated to a dismissal with prejudice and failed to show the extraordinary circumstances required for relief under Rule 60(b)(6). The court emphasizes that this rule is an equitable remedy used sparingly and requires that extraordinary circumstances prevented timely action to correct a judgment, with mere inexperience not qualifying as such. Bykov's contentions regarding the district court’s discovery orders were not considered due to a lack of jurisdiction over those matters. The court also denied Bykov’s motion to supplement the record on appeal. The decision is affirmed and noted as not suitable for publication, with no precedential value except as permitted by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.