9th Cir.;
15-15799

The court of appeals affirmed a district court order. The court held that a federal judge's alleged Twitter activity did not warrant recusal.

Following its investigation of a devastating forest fire, the government filed a civil action against private forestry operators Sierra Pacific Industries and others, alleging that their negligence caused the fire. Extensive discovery over the next three years led defendants to believe the government had engaged in fraud during and after its investigation of the fire, in an attempt to blame the fire on them. Despite these concerns, defendants entered into a settlement agreement. After discovering additional alleged misrepresentations, they moved for relief from judgment under Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 60(d)(3), arguing the government's misrepresentations constituted fraud on the court. The district court denied the motion, finding none of defendants' allegations established that the government committed fraud on the court within the meaning of Rule 60.