Opinion
MEMORANDUM DECISION
ROBERT S. BARDWIL, Bankruptcy Judge.
Debtors Janet Cheng and William Cheng (the "debtors") have purportedly set the following matters for hearing in Department C of this court:
(1) Chengs['] Motion to Vacate Judge Bardwil XX-X-XXXX Orders, filed December 8, 2014, DN 740 (the "Motion"), in which the debtors requested that a different judge of this court, the Honorable Christopher M. Klein, to whom this case is not assigned, vacate a memorandum decision and several orders previously issued by the undersigned;
The debtors also asked that the presiding judge hear the motion; thus, it appears the debtors selected Judge Klein because he is the Chief Judge of this court.
(2) Chengs['] Supplemental Motion to Submit the Evidences of Undisputed Facts for Jury Trial Local Rule 7038-1, filed February 6, 2015, DN 765 (the "Supplemental Motion"), in which the debtors purported to submit certain enumerated alleged facts, stated that they are permitted to request of Judge Klein a jury trial in his court, and requested that Judge Klein "enforce the bankruptcy laws and the local rules" for the chapter 7 trustee to produce certain documents; and
(3) Notice to Judge Klein Dept C and BNC to Calendar the X-XX-XXXX Hearing to Vacate Order, Etc., filed February 19, 2015, DN 780 (the "Notice"), in which the debtors stated that the hearing date of February 24, 2015 "was not calendared by BNC" because of the error of an incorrect hearing date. The debtors requested that the court grant them a hearing on February 24, 2015 or the earliest hearing date in March 2015.
The Motion, Supplemental Motion, and Notice all contained in the caption a hearing date, time, and place of February 24, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. in Department C of this court, Courtroom 35, before Judge Klein. The record in this case reveals that the debtors have been repeatedly informed by the office of the Clerk of the Court that motions purportedly set before Judge Klein will not be calendared because the case is assigned to the undersigned. As a result, the Motion and Supplemental Motion were not calendared for hearing.
It appears from the Notice that the debtors have misunderstood the Clerk's earlier cautions or for some other reason continue to insist that their motions be heard by Judge Klein. The debtors referred in the Notice to alleged conflicts of interest of the undersigned as apparent support for their insistence on having their matters heard by Judge Klein. The court has already denied the debtors' earlier request to disqualify the undersigned. See Order filed Dec. 5, 2014, DN 737. Nothing in the Motion, Supplemental Motion, or Notice provides any grounds for reconsideration of that decision.
Further, the Motion and Supplemental Motion are nothing more than a re-hashing of arguments the debtors have made in this case many times, which have been ruled on many times. The debtors have not appealed any of the court's rulings since May of 2014, and in particular, they have not appealed the orders they have requested in the Motion be vacated by Judge Klein. They have already obtained a ruling on their motion to disqualify the undersigned, which they did not appeal. The court finds nothing new in the Motion, the Supplemental Motion, or the Notice.
For the reasons stated, the Motion and the Supplemental Motion will be denied, and the request in the Notice that a hearing be set will be denied.