Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01498/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01498-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MIKE STARRETT ,

Plaintiff,

v.

CLIFFORD ALLENBY, et al., 

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-01498-AWI-MJS (PC)

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR STAY, 

REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF 

COUNSEL, AND REQUEST FOR 

DISMISSAL 

(ECF No. 13)

CLERK TO FAX COPY OF THIS ORDER 

TO LITIGATION COORDINATOR AT 

FRESNO COUNTY JAIL

THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 13, 2015, the Court 

screened Plaintiff’s complaint and ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint or notify 

the Court of his willingness to proceed only on his cognizable claim. (ECF No. 8.) 

Plaintiff sought and received an extension of time to respond. (ECF Nos. 11, 12.)

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s June 24, 2015 motion to stay proceedings pending 

his release from Fresno County Jail. (ECF No. 13.) It appears Plaintiff presently is 

detained at the jail on criminal charges. He states that he does not have access to legal 

resources because only individuals representing themselves in criminal actions have 

Case 1:14-cv-01498-MJS Document 14 Filed 07/13/15 Page 1 of 4
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

access to the jail’s “Legal Research Kiosk.” He asks that the Court order one of the 

following forms of relief: (1) that the action be stayed until his release from jail or for a 

period of one year, (2) that he be appointed counsel, (3) that the action be dismissed 

without prejudice, or (4) that the Court order other appropriate relief.

II. ACCESS TO LEGAL RESOURCES

Plaintiff’s right of access to the Courts includes access to a law library and a 

reasonable amount of time to use the law library. Lindquist v. Idaho State Bd. of 

Corrections, 776 F.2d 851, 858 (9th Cir.1985). The Court suspects that the “Legal 

Research Kiosk” referred to in Plaintiff’s motion is but one means for jail detainees to 

access legal resources. Plaintiff likely has other constitutionally adequate means of 

accessing legal resources at the jail. The Court will direct the Clerk’s Office to fax a copy 

of this order to the Litigation Coordinator at the jail, and hereby requests the 

Coordinator’s assistance in resolving Plaintiff’s concerns.

III. REQUEST FOR STAY

Plaintiff seeks a stay of up to one year. 

“The proponent of the stay bears the burden of establishing its need.” Clinton v. 

Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997). Here, Plaintiff has not established his need for a stay. 

As stated, although Plaintiff may not have access to a “Legal Research Kiosk,” he likely 

has constitutionally adequate access to legal resources at the jail. Absent a further 

showing that Plaintiff has attempted to research his claims but was unable to, the Court 

is unlikely to entertain a request to stay.

IV. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, 

Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an 

attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1), Mallard v. United 

States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In

certain exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of 

Case 1:14-cv-01498-MJS Document 14 Filed 07/13/15 Page 2 of 4
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

counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However, without a 

reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek volunteer 

counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 

Aexceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of 

success of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in 

light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.@ Id. (internal quotation marks and 

citations omitted).

In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional 

circumstances. Even if it is assumed that plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he 

has made serious allegations which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not 

exceptional. This court is faced with similar cases almost daily. Further, at this early 

stage in the proceedings, the court cannot make a determination that plaintiff is likely to 

succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the record in this case, the court does 

not find that plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. Id.

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel will be 

denied without prejudice.

V. VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF ACTION

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), a plaintiff may dismiss an 

action without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal before the opposing party 

serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.

Here, the Court finds Plaintiff’s somewhat equivocal request to dismiss insufficient

under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). However, if Plaintiff wishes to dismiss this action without 

prejudice, he may do so at this time by filing a notice of voluntary dismissal.

VI. EXTENSION OF TIME

In light of the foregoing, the Court will grant Plaintiff an additional thirty days to 

either (1) amend his complaint, (2) notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on 

his cognizable claim, or (3) file a notice of voluntary dismissal.

Case 1:14-cv-01498-MJS Document 14 Filed 07/13/15 Page 3 of 4
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

4

VII. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request for stay (ECF No. 13) is DENIED without prejudice;

2. Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 13) is DENIED 

without prejudice;

3. Plaintiff’s request for dismissal (ECF No. 13) is DENIED without prejudice;

4. Within thirty days of the date of this order, Plaintiff shall either (1) file an 

amended pleading, (2) notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only 

on his cognizable claim, or (3) file a notice of voluntary dismissal;

5. If Plaintiff fails to respond to this order within thirty days, the action will be 

dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to obey a court order and failure to 

prosecute;

6. The Clerk’s Office is directed to fax a copy of this order to the Litigation 

Coordinator at the Fresno County Jail; and

7. The Court requests that the Litigation Coordinator assist Plaintiff in 

accessing legal resources that may be available to him at the jail.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 13, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01498-MJS Document 14 Filed 07/13/15 Page 4 of 4