Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00817/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00817-9/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JULIUS CARTER ANDERSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-0817 MCE KJM P

vs.

W. HARTLEY, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff requests the 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. 

Plaintiff also requests an extension of time to file an opposition to defendants’

December 1, 2006 motion for summary judgment. Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s request will 

be granted.

Case 2:03-cv-00817-MCE -KJM Document 79 Filed 08/16/07 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

2

Plaintiff requests that the court order the California Department of Corrections

and Rehabilitation (CDCR) provide plaintiff with a computer-based word processor due to

physical problems making it difficult for plaintiff to write or use a typewriter. The court notes

that plaintiff’s motion was typewritten by another inmate. Also, plaintiff has not indicated that

he has asked CDCR officials for access to a computer-based word processor. In light of these

facts, and the fact that plaintiff has not adequately explained why he needs a computer based

machine instead of a typewriter to pursue this action, his request will be denied. 

Finally, plaintiff asks that the court “issue an additional order directing defendants

to allow plaintiff to secure legal copies, research materials to enable preparation of motions,

objections and responses to defendants and the court.” However, plaintiff has not shown how

the issuance of such an order is necessary for plaintiff to pursue this action. This request will be

denied.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s July 5, 2007 request for the appointment of counsel is denied.

2. Plaintiff's July 5, 2007 motion for an extension of time is granted. 

3. Plaintiff is granted fifteen days from the date of this order in which to file and

serve his opposition to defendants’ December 1, 2006 motion for summary judgment.

Defendants' reply, if any, shall be filed seven days thereafter.

4. Plaintiff’s request that the court order that the California Department of

Corrections provide him with a computer-based word processor is denied.

5. Plaintiff’s request that the court order defendants provide plaintiff with “legal

copies from law books,” and “research materials” is denied.

DATED: August 16, 2007. 

1/mp/ande0817.36+31

Case 2:03-cv-00817-MCE -KJM Document 79 Filed 08/16/07 Page 2 of 2