Whether HONORABLE Judge DAN A POLSTER Judicial Immunity is IMMUNE FROM BY NOT RECUSING HIMSELF when petitioner discovered Judge Polsten was personally CONNECTED to ATTORNEY Representatives of DEFENDANTS TAP PHARMACEUTICAL Products TUC Kaiser foundation Health AND DEFENDANT'S Plan who employs A physician with the SAME NAME As Judge POLSTEN AND Were the avid rights 28 USC 455 was Violated when evidentary photograph w hut explanation Destrutel to his Chambers To petitioner forut, or Despent?

Whether a judge's refusal to recuse himself after being photographed in his chambers violates the petitioner's civil rights under 42 USC 1983