Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01372/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01372-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH DANNY PROPHET, )

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

ALLISON DUNHAM, et al., )

)

)

)

Defendants. )

 )

1:07cv1372 OWW DLB

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR COUNSEL

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF

ADDITIONAL TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS

(Document 8)

Plaintiff Joseph Danny Prophet (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

forma pauperis in this action. Plaintiff filed his complaint on September 19, 2007. On October

2, 2007, the Court issued Findings and Recommendation that the complaint be dismissed without

leave to amend. Plaintiff was instructed that objections were due within thirty (30) days of the

date of service of that order.

On October 22, 2007, Plaintiff filed a motion to appoint counsel and a request for an

extension of time to file objections. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district

courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard

v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct.

1814, 1816 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary

assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520,

1525 (9th Cir. 1997). Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, this

Case 1:07-cv-01372-OWW -DLB Document 9 Filed 10/23/07 Page 1 of 2
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

court will seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. 

In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. See

Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. Even if it is assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that

he has made serious allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not

exceptional. This Court is faced with similar cases almost daily. Therefore, plaintiff's request

for the appointment of counsel shall be DENIED.

Pursuant to Plaintiff’s request for additional time, he is GRANTED twenty (20) days

from the date of service of this order within which to file his objections to the October 2, 2007,

Findings and Recommendation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 23, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01372-OWW -DLB Document 9 Filed 10/23/07 Page 2 of 2