FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit

December 5, 2005

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

SHEILA BILYEU,

               Plaintiff‑Appellant,

v.

THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN; NOLAN CLAY,

               Defendants‑Appellees.	

No.  05-6010
(D.C. No. 04-CV-1428-R)
(W.D. Okla.)	

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before KELLY, McKAY, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

	After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal.  See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).  The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
	Pro se plaintiff Sheila Bilyeu was the Independent Party candidate for Oklahoma’s United States Senate seat in 2004.  As such, she was the subject of a September 6, 2004, newspaper article written by Nolan Clay and published by The Daily Oklahoman (“defendants”).  Dissatisfied with the article and a photograph “that made her look weird,” Ms. Bileyu sued defendants in state court “for discrimination and conspiracy to ruin her life and her candidacy for the U.S. Senate,” Aplee. App. Doc. 2 at 2 (complaint).
	Defendants removed the case to federal court and filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).  The district court granted defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion and dismissed the case with prejudice.  This appeal followed.  
	Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.  We review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).  Sutton v. Utah State Sch. for the Deaf & Blind, 173 F.3d 1226, 1236 (10th Cir. 1999).  Because Ms. Bilyeu is representing herself, we construe her pleadings liberally.  Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). 

	On appeal, Ms. Bilyeu contends that the district court judge should have recused himself because he has twice previously ruled against her.  But “‘adverse rulings cannot in themselves form the appropriate grounds for disqualification.’” United States v. Nickl, 427 F.3d 1286, 1298 (10th Cir. 2005) (quoting Green v. Branson, 108 F.3d 1296, 1305 (10th Cir. 1997)).  We therefore hold that, on the facts of this case, the district court judge was not required to recuse himself.  
	We likewise reject Ms. Bilyeu’s assertion that the district court erred by granting defendants’ 12(b)(6) motion.  Having carefully reviewed the briefs, the record, and applicable law, we agree with the district court that Ms. Bilyeu’s complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).			
	Andrew S. Bestor’s motion for leave of the court to file an amicus curiae brief is DENIED.  Ms. Bilyeu’s motion to find appellees “out of time” is DENIED.  The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.		

								
				Entered for the Court

				Michael W. McConnell
				Circuit Judge