Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01195/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01195-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 1Thereafter, the City Attorney filed an answer on behalf of said defendants.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

 

 

 

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHANNON B. JAMES,

Plaintiff,

 v.

BERKELEY POLICE DEPT.,

OFFICER BRUCE FEDULOFF,

OFFICER LESTER SOO, et al., 

Defendants.

__________________________

_

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 04-1195 MMC (PR)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO

NOTIFY COURT WHETHER HE

SEEKS APPOINTMENT OF PRO

BONO COUNSEL

Plaintiff, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed the above-titled civil rights

complaint against certain Berkeley police officers and various municipal entities, alleging

violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the use of excessive force during the course of his

arrest. By order filed September 14, 2005, the Court granted in part and denied in part

defendants’ motion for summary judgment, with the effect that only two individuals, Officers

Bruce Feduloff (“Feduloff”) and Lester Soo (“Soo”), remain as defendants to the action. 

Additionally, the Court ordered the City Attorney for the City of Berkeley to notify the Court

as to whether she represents defendants Feduloff and Soo in this matter, and, if so, to file an

answer to the complaint on their behalf.1 Lastly, the Court ordered plaintiff to notify the

Court as to whether he intends to prosecute this matter. He has notified the Court that he so

intends. 

Because plaintiff is incarcerated and the case is ready to be set for trial, and because pro

Case 3:04-cv-01195-MMC Document 18 Filed 10/31/05 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

bono counsel may be available to represent plaintiff, plaintiff shall file with the Court, within

thirty (30) days of the date of this order, either a request for appointment of counsel or a

notice that plaintiff intends to proceed without counsel. If plaintiff requests appointment of

counsel, the Court will endeavor to locate an attorney to represent him pro bono, i.e., at no

cost to plaintiff. Plaintiff is hereby advised that if he does not request appointment of counsel

within the time afforded herein, plaintiff will continue to proceed pro se and will be required to

represent himself without the assistance of counsel in all future proceedings, including trial. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 31, 2005 _____________________________

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-01195-MMC Document 18 Filed 10/31/05 Page 2 of 2