Federal Case

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that interlocutory appeal is only justified under “exceptional circumstances.”
• listing three criteria a petitioner must meet before a district court will certify an order for interlocutory appeal
• defining a 5 “controlling question of law” as one that “could materially affect the outcome of litigation 6 in the district court”
• declining to permit an immediate appeal under the collateral order doctrine of an order granting a motion to recuse the presiding judge because it did not irrevocably violate a cognizable right
• Section 1292(b) is “to be used only in exceptional situations in which 14 15 allowing an interlocutory appeal would avoid protracted and expensive litigation”
• “Since an appellate decision that 2 recusal was improper could in no way materially affect the eventual outcome of the litigation, we 3 cannot view the question as controlling.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).