Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-04184/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-04184-1/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 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ISAURO GONZALES, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

LE VOS, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No.16-cv-04184-PJH 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

APPOINT COUNSEL 

Re: Dkt. No. 10 

This is a civil rights case brought pro se by a detainee. Plaintiff has filed a motion 

to appoint counsel. There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case, Lassiter v. 

Dep't of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981), and although district courts may 

"request" that counsel represent a litigant who is proceeding in forma pauperis, as 

plaintiff is here, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), that does not give the courts the power to 

make "coercive appointments of counsel." Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 

296, 310 (1989). 

The Ninth Circuit has held that a district court may ask counsel to represent an 

indigent litigant only in "exceptional circumstances," the determination of which requires 

an evaluation of both (1) the likelihood of success on the merits and (2) the ability of the 

plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues 

involved. Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991). Plaintiff has presented 

his claims adequately, and the issues are not complex. 

Case 4:16-cv-04184-PJH Document 11 Filed 11/03/16 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

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 

Da

\\can

041

Theref

IT IS S

ated: Novem

ndoak.cand.circ9

84-PJH-dny_cou

fore, the mo

SO ORDER

mber 3, 201

 

9.dcn\data\users

unsel.docx 

otion to app

RED. 

16 

\PJHALL\_psp\2

2

point counse

016\2016_04184

el (Docket 

 

PH

Un

4_Gonzales_v_C

No. 10) is D

HYLLIS J. H

nited States

City_of_San_Jos

DENIED. 

HAMILTON

s District Ju

se_Police_Dept_

N

udge 

(PSP)\16-cvCase 4:16-cv-04184-PJH Document 11 Filed 11/03/16 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

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 

IS

LE

Dis

pla

dep

rec

Isa

Co

701

Mi

Da

SAURO GON

v. 

E VOS, et al

I, the un

strict Court, 

That on

acing said co

positing said

ceptacle loca

auro Gonzal

unty Jail 

1 South Able

ilpitas, CA 9

ated: Novemb

NZALES, 

Plaintiff, 

l., 

Defendants

ndersigned, 

Northern Di

n November 

opy(ies) in a 

d envelope in

ated in the Cl

es ID: AYA

e Street 

95035 

ber 3, 2016 

 

UNITED

NORTHER

s. 

hereby certi

istrict of Cal

3, 2016, I S

postage paid

n the U.S. M

lerk's office.

A300/150540

3

D STATES D

RN DISTRIC

fy that I am 

lifornia. 

ERVED a tr

d envelope a

Mail, or by pla

.

037

Su

Cl

By

N

H

DISTRICT C

CT OF CALI

Case No. 1

CERTIFIC

an employe

rue and corre

addressed to 

acing said co

usan Y. Soon

lerk, United

y:_________

Nichole Peric

Honorable PH

COURT 

IFORNIA 

16-cv-04184

CATE OF S

ee in the Offi

ect copy(ies)

the person(s

opy(ies) into

ng 

d States Distr

___________

c, Deputy Cle

HYLLIS J. H

4-PJH 

SERVICE 

ice of the Cl

) of the attac

s) hereinafte

o an inter-off

rict Court 

_______ 

erk to the 

HAMILTON

erk, U.S. 

ched, by 

er listed, by 

ffice delivery

N

y

Case 4:16-cv-04184-PJH Document 11 Filed 11/03/16 Page 3 of 3