Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01208/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01208-2/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 

CARL FOUST, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

OMONIYI TEMITOPE ANKINTOLA, et 

al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:23-cv-1208 AC P 

ORDER 

 By order filed June 27, 2023, plaintiff was directed to file a completed in forma pauperis 

application or pay the filing fee and to submit a signed complaint. ECF No. 3. He was cautioned 

that failure to comply with either directive would result in a recommendation that this action be 

dismissed. Id. at 2. After the time for compliance passed, the court noted that plaintiff had filed 

only an unsigned first amended complaint; plaintiff was given another opportunity to file a signed 

complaint and to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the fee. ECF No. 6. 

He was cautioned that failure to comply with either part of the order would result in a 

recommendation that this action be dismissed without further warning. Id. The time to comply 

with that order has now passed, and though plaintiff has filed two motions for leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis and a motion for appointment of counsel (ECF Nos. 7-10), he has once again 

failed to file a signed complaint. 

Case 2:23-cv-01208-DJC-AC Document 10 Filed 09/21/23 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 

It may be that plaintiff did not file a signed complaint because he was waiting for a ruling 

on his motion for appointment of counsel. Accordingly, plaintiff will be provided one final 

opportunity to comply with the court’s order. Plaintiff is advised that he is required to file a 

signed complaint even if he files another motion for appointment of counsel. Failure to 

comply will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without further 

warning. 

With respect to plaintiff’s motion 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 district 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). 

“When determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances’ exist, a court must consider ‘the 

likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims 

pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 

970 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). The burden 

of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. 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. 

Plaintiff requests counsel on the grounds that his is legally blind, requires assistance with 

reading and writing, has mobility impairments, and uses slow and simple communication. ECF 

No. 8 at 1. The request will be denied because the mere claim that plaintiff suffers from these 

conditions is not enough to establish exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of 

counsel. If plaintiff chooses to file another motion for appointment of counsel, he should specify 

how his conditions prevent him from proceeding without assistance and provide medical 

documentation supporting his claimed impairments. 

//// 

//// 

Case 2:23-cv-01208-DJC-AC Document 10 Filed 09/21/23 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 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 8) is DENIED; 

2. Within twenty-one days of the filing of this order, plaintiff shall submit a signed 

complaint; and 

3. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be 

dismissed without further warning. 

DATED: September 20, 2023 

Case 2:23-cv-01208-DJC-AC Document 10 Filed 09/21/23 Page 3 of 3