of supervised release, with special conditions to include custodial arrangements at a mental health facility. ANALYSIS A. Motion for Disqualification Vaught argues that the district court improperly denied his Motion for Disqualification of Judges from Middle District of Tennessee. We review a district court’s denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) motion to disqualify for abuse of discretion. United States v. Sammons, 918 F.2d 592, 599 (6th Cir.1990). Under that statute, a judge “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). We have defined this to mean that “a judge must recuse himself if a reasonable, objective person, knowing all of the circumstances, would have questioned the judge’s impartiality.” Hughe ir.2002) (<HOLDING>). B. Sentencing under USSG § 2A2.1 (Attempted
holding that where doctor never had contact with patient nor reviewed patients records no relationship existed so as to trigger a duty holding that court did not have personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendant where defendant assignee received patents from assignor over whom court had personal jurisdiction in part because the unilateral activity of those who claim some relationship with a nonresident defendant cannot satisfy the requirement of contact with the forum state holding that where a witness had been convicted seventeen years earlier but had been given probation and had not been confined the date of the conviction controlled holding that the district court had discretion where plaintiff sought to amend a count that had been dismissed with prejudice holding no abuse of discretion where judge had personal relationship with government witnesses but had not had contact with them for over ten years