Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01056/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01056-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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

1

 Citations are to the Electronic Case File (“ECF”).

ORDER AND NOTICE (No. 3:15-cv-01056-LB)

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

San Francisco Division

APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP, INC et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

VIVEK SOMANI,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

No. 3:15-cv-01056-LB

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S

REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL AND SECOND NOTICE

REGARDING LEGAL HELP DESK

AND HANDBOOK FOR LITIGANTS

WITHOUT A LAWYER

I. INTRODUCTION

On March 6, 2015, Apollo Education Group, Inc. and University of Phoenix, Inc., the plaintiffs

in this case, filed a complaint against Vivek Somani, the pro se defendant. (Complaint, ECF No. 1.1

)

The complaint alleges: (1) trademark infringement; (2) cybersquatting; and (3) unfair competition.

(Id.) Mr. Somani has contacted the court by letters dated May 25, 2015 and June 7, 2015. (Letters,

ECF Nos. 11 & 17.) In each of these letters, Mr. Somani requests that the court appoint him counsel.

(Id.) As the court explains below, there is generally no right to have counsel appointed in civil cases.

Nor does the court find that this case presents “exceptional circumstances.” The court therefore

DENIES Mr. Somani's request at this point in the litigation. 

II. DISCUSSION

Unless a party may lose his physical liberty if he loses the case, there is generally no

constitutional right to an attorney in a civil action. See Lassiter v. Dep’t of Soc. Serv. of Durham

Case 3:15-cv-01056-EMC Document 21 Filed 06/19/15 Page 1 of 3
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

ORDER AND NOTICE (No. 3:15-cv-01056-LB)

2

Cnty., N.C., 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981); Nicholson v. Rushen, 767 F.2d 1426, 1427 (9th Cir. 1985)

(citation omitted). Nonetheless, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) permits a court to “request an attorney to

represent a person who is unable to afford counsel,” but only in “exceptional circumstances.” See

Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991). To determine whether “exceptional

circumstances” exist, the trial court should evaluate (1) the likelihood of the indigent party’s success

on the merits, and (2) the indigent party’s ability to articulate his claims in light of the complexity of

the legal issues involved. Id. “Neither of these factors is dispositive and both must be viewed

together before reaching a decision.” Id. (quotations and citation omitted).

In this case, Mr. Somani contends that appointment of counsel is proper because: (1) his current

monthly income is less than $1,000; (2) he is unable to defend this suit at his own cost; (3) he lives

in India, and he is unfamiliar with the United States court system; and (4) without appointment of

counsel, it is impossible for him to decide whether to consent to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate

Judge. (ECF Nos. 11 & 17.)

While Mr. Somani has filed a Statement of Defense, which includes what may be meritorious

defenses, what the Statement of Defense suggests to the court is that Mr. Somani is well able to

present his claims. (ECF No. 13.) Mr. Somani's motion to dismiss and letters requesting appointment

of counsel are well-written and well-organized. (ECF Nos. 11 & 17; Motion, ECF No. 14.) To the

extent that Mr. Somani may require some assistance with the law and the procedures of this court,

on June 4, 2015, the court notified Mr. Somani of legal resources available to him. (Notice, ECF No.

16.) The court provided Mr. Somani with contact information to the court's Legal Help Center, and

also attached a copy of the Northern District's Handbook for Litigants Without a Lawyer. (Id.) The

court is further advised that the Legal Help Center may contact Mr. Somani to explain its services, in

which case the court encourages Mr. Somani to explore whether the Legal Help Center may be of

assistance to him. 

III. CONCLUSION

Considering Mr. Somani's ability to clearly articulate his claims and the legal resources already

available to Mr. Somani, the court finds that “exceptional circumstances” do not exist which would 

Case 3:15-cv-01056-EMC Document 21 Filed 06/19/15 Page 2 of 3
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

ORDER AND NOTICE (No. 3:15-cv-01056-LB)

3

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

warrant an appointment of counsel at this point. As such, Mr. Somani's request for appointment of 

counsel is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 19 , 2015

 _______________________________ LAUREL BEELER

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-01056-EMC Document 21 Filed 06/19/15 Page 3 of 3