Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02366/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02366-4/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 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DANIEL MENDOZA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NEAL P. SWANN, D.D.S., 

Defendant. 

No. 2:13-cv-2366 AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights 

action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendant has not consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate 

judge. Pending before the court are (1) plaintiff’s motion for an extension of the discovery 

deadline, (2) defendant’s motion for an extension of time to file an answer, and (3) plaintiff’s 

motion for appointment of counsel. 

 1. Extension of Discovery Deadline 

 The court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order set January 20, 2015 as the deadline for 

conducting discovery and the filing of discovery motions. ECF No. 20. Plaintiff asks for an 

additional 60 or 90 days to conduct discovery. ECF No. 31. Defendant has filed a Statement of 

Non-Opposition. ECF No. 33. The discovery deadline will be extended by 90 days. 

 2. Extension of Time To Answer 

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint was served on defendant Swann on December 4, 

Case 2:13-cv-02366-AC Document 39 Filed 01/13/15 Page 1 of 3
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

2014. See ECF No. 32 ¶ 6. On December 17, 2014, defendant timely requested a 30-day 

extension of time to file an answer. ECF No. 32. On December 22, 2015, defendant filed his 

answer, having missed the 14-day period allotted for responding to an amended pleading. See 

ECF No. 34; Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(3). Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to this motion. The 

motion for an extension of time will therefore be granted, and the answer will be deemed to be 

timely filed. 

3. Appointment of Counsel 

District courts may not require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. 

Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, where willing counsel 

is available, the district court “may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford 

counsel.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of America, 390 F.3d 1101, 

1103 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 545 U.S. 1128 (2005). 

The district court may appoint such counsel where “exceptional circumstances” exist. 

Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 559 U.S. 906 (2010) (citing 

Agyeman, 390 F.3d at 1103). In determining whether or not exceptional circumstances exist, “a 

court must consider ‘the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner 

to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Palmer, 

560 F.3d at 970 (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). Circumstances 

common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not 

establish exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of 

counsel. See, e.g., Guess v. Lopez, 2014 WL 1883875 at *5 (E.D. Cal. 2014) (Claire, M.J.). The 

court does not find exceptional circumstances in this case, at this time. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

1. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of the discovery deadline (ECF No. 31), is 

GRANTED. Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 20 at 

5) are AMENDED to read: 

6. The parties may conduct discovery until April 20, 2015. Any motions 

necessary to compel discovery shall be filed by that date. All requests for 

Case 2:13-cv-02366-AC Document 39 Filed 01/13/15 Page 2 of 3
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 

3

discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 31, 33, 34 or 36 shall be served not later than 

sixty days prior to that date (February 19, 2015). 

7. All pretrial motions, except motions to compel discovery, shall be filed on or 

before July 20, 2015. Motions shall be briefed in accordance with paragraph 8 of 

this court’s order filed May 28, 2014 (ECF No. 17). 

 2. Defendant's timely motion for an extension of time to answer (ECF No. 32), is 

GRANTED nunc pro tunc, and his Answer, filed December 22, 2014 (ECF No. 34), is deemed to 

be timely filed. 

 3. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 35), is DENIED without 

prejudice. 

DATED: January 11, 2015 

Case 2:13-cv-02366-AC Document 39 Filed 01/13/15 Page 3 of 3