Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05999/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05999-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES M. V. AMADEO,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN DAVEY; et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 06-5999 MHP (pr)

ORDER 

Plaintiff has filed a motion for permission to file a motion for reconsideration and

motion for reconsideration in which he asks the court to rethink the dismissal of some of his

claims in the Order Of Service And Partial Dismissal. The motions are DENIED. (Docket #

10, # 16.) Plaintiff has not presented newly discovered evidence, the court did not commit

clear error or make a manifestly unjust decision as dismissal of the dismissed claims was

proper, and there has not been a change in controlling law. See School Dist. No. 11 v.

ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993); Civil L.R. 7-9. 

Plaintiff also has filed a motion for appointment of counsel to represent him in this

action. A district court has the discretion under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(1) to designate counsel

to represent an indigent civil litigant in exceptional circumstances. See Wilborn v.

Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). This requires an evaluation of both the

likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro

se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. See id. Neither of these factors is

Case 3:06-cv-05999-MHP Document 32 Filed 10/22/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

dispositive and both must be viewed together before deciding on a request for counsel under

section 1915(e)(1). Exceptional circumstances requiring the appointment of counsel are not

evident. The motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. (Docket # 16.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 19, 2007 ______________________

 Marilyn Hall Patel

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05999-MHP Document 32 Filed 10/22/07 Page 2 of 2