Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02048/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02048-1/pdf.json

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

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BILLY JONES, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2048 DFL KJM P

vs.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY

SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

I. Appointment of Counsel

On August 15, 2005, plaintiff filed a request for appointment of counsel. 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 Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296,

298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance

of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.

1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the

court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s request for the

appointment of counsel will therefore be denied at this time.

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02048-RRB -KJM Document 80 Filed 10/12/05 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

II. Order to Show Cause

On August 3, 2005 and August 5, 2005, defendants filed motions for summary

judgment (docket nos. 39, 45, 50 56, 61) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Plaintiff has

not opposed the motions. 

Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file

written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any

opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” On December 17, 2004, plaintiff was advised of

the requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion

may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. 

Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be

grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the

inherent power of the Court.” In the order filed December 17, 2004, plaintiff was advised that

failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be

dismissed.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel is denied; and

2. Within thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if

any, to the motions for summary judgment. Failure to file an opposition will be deemed as a

statement of non-opposition and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed

pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

DATED: October 12, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

jone2048.31

Case 2:04-cv-02048-RRB -KJM Document 80 Filed 10/12/05 Page 2 of 2