Judge Rejects Recusal Bid Over Clerk Courtroom Hug in Pork Case

The federal judge overseeing litigation that accuses Tyson Foods Inc., data analytics firm Agri Stats Inc., and other defendants of fixing the price of pork denied a motion to recuse himself, saying a clerk’s work on the case was within ethical guidelines.

Judge John R. Tunheim of the US District Court for the District of Minnesota in a Tuesday order denied the defendants’ motion for his recusal, saying that even if the clerk was found to have sufficient bias to give rise to a conflict of interest, “the Court finds that disqualification and recusal is not necessary because a reasonable observer who was fully informed of the facts based on the record would not question the judge’s impartiality.”

In their motion, the defendants said the clerk had worked for three different entities suing protein producers for antitrust violations based on Agri Stats; had a pending offer of employment from one of the leading plaintiffs’ firms in the litigation; and publicly embraced plaintiffs’ attorneys in the courtroom immediately following a hearing in the case.

The clerk wasn’t named in the opinion, and the name was redacted from the recusal motion.

Tunheim also rejected the defendants’ motion to vacate his earlier ruling that denied the companies’ bid for summary judgment in the litigation, which dates to 2018.

“This complex multi-district litigation is now ready for its first trial,” Tunheim said. “At no other point have Defendants questioned the Court’s ability to properly perform its duties in an impartial manner.”

Federal judges must recuse themselves for reasons that include having a personal bias concerning a party in the suit, a family member involved, or a financial interest in the case.

Defendants including Seaboard Foods LLC, Clemens Food Group LLC, and Triumph Foods LLC in April sought Tunheim’s recusal, saying the clerk was substantially conflicted and that the clerk’s involvement in this case created an appearance of impropriety.

Tunheim, however, said the clerk in question was “one of more than a half-dozen law clerks who have worked on this matter over the course of more than seven years and dozens of motions.”

And while the companies’ motion may have been timely, the fact that they waited until after both evidentiary and summary judgment orders had been issued “weighs in favor of finding the timing of Defendants’ motion to be more tactical than sincere,” Tunheim said.

The defendant companies didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The plaintiffs are represented by firms including Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP.

Agri Stats is represented by Hogan Lovells US LLP. Triumph Foods LLC is represented by Husch Blackwell LLP. Tyson is represented by Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP. Clemens Food Group LLC is represented by Kirkland & Ellis LLP. Seaboard Foods is represented by Stinson LLP.

The case is In re Pork Antitrust Litig., D. Minn., No. 0:18-cv-01776, 10/7/25.