Whether the district judge should be disqualified from presiding over a case based on bias or prejudicial, financial interest, or other impermissible undisclosed conflicts of interest

QUESTION PRESENTED While the reviewability of a judicial disqualification decision must be analyzed in terms of the underlying basis for the judicial disqualification motion, the statutory grounds for judicial disqualification are made of no effect when analyzed based on the suitability of mandamus, the collateral order doctrine, and certification under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) as devices to gain immediate appellate review. If the judge had unwaivable disqualifying conflicts, the fact that the judge should have self-recused without waiting for a party to file a motion to disqualify, was not considered or appropriately analyzed by the court of appeals in its review of the disqualification decision. The questions are: (1) Whether the district judge should be disqualified from presiding over a case based on bias or prejudicial, financial interest, or other impermissible undisclosed conflicts of interest. (2) Whether the district judge should be recused and a successor judge appointed for the district judge’s failure to disclose potentially disqualifying situation(s) involving personal bias or prejudice or potential financial interests that cannot be waived. (3) Whether any of the district court’s procedural rulings constituted disqualifying conditions that can lead to the judge’s disqualification or the imposition of disciplinary sanctions for the judge’s failure to self-disqualify. (4) Whether the district judge’s extrajudicial conduct and/or comments about the Petitioner require disqualification and reversal of the judgment.