§ 352. Review of complaint by chief judge

• (a) The chief judge shall expeditiously review any complaint received under section 351(a) or identified under section 351(b). In determining what action to take, the chief judge may conduct a limited inquiry for the purpose of determining—
  • (1) whether appropriate corrective action has been or can be taken without the necessity for a formal investigation; and
  • (2) whether the facts stated in the complaint are either plainly untrue or are incapable of being established through investigation.
• (b) After expeditiously reviewing a complaint under subsection (a), the chief judge, by written order stating his or her reasons, may—
  • (1) dismiss the complaint—
    • (A) if the chief judge finds the complaint to be—
      • (i) not in conformity with section 351(a);
      • (ii) directly related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling; or
      • (iii) frivolous, lacking sufficient evidence to raise an inference that misconduct has occurred, or containing allegations which are incapable of being established through investigation; or
    • (B) when a limited inquiry conducted under subsection (a) demonstrates that the allegations in the complaint lack any factual foundation or are conclusively refuted by objective evidence; or
  • (2) conclude the proceeding if the chief judge finds that appropriate corrective action has been taken or that action on the complaint is no longer necessary because of intervening events.
• (c) A complainant or judge aggrieved by a final order of the chief judge under this section may petition the judicial council of the circuit for review thereof. The denial of a petition for review of the chief judge’s order shall be final and conclusive and shall not be judicially reviewable on appeal or otherwise.
• (d) Each judicial council may, pursuant to rules prescribed under section 358, refer a petition for review filed under subsection (c) to a panel of no fewer than 5 members of the council, at least 2 of whom shall be district judges.