Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01948/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01948-5/pdf.json

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

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES PATTERSON,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WARDEN AND HOUSING SUPERVISOR,

Defendants. 

Case No. 1:12-cv-01948 JLT (PC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

APPOINT COUNSEL 

(Doc. 18).

On September 23, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (Doc. 18). 

Plaintiff reports that he has been prescribed “psych medication which clouds his mind,” and 

suffers from, among other things, schizophrenia. (Doc. 18 at 2). He further indicates that he has 

“self-identified as requiring (ADA) assistance reading...[and] writing.” Id For the reasons set

forth below, Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel is DENIED.

Plaintiff is advised that he 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, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). 

However, in certain exceptional circumstances the court may request the voluntary assistance of 

counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 

Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek 

Case 1:12-cv-01948-DAD-JLT Document 20 Filed 09/27/13 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

27

28

2

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

“exceptional 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, as alleged, 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 determine whether Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits. On the other hand,

throughout this litigation, Plaintiff has been able to fully articulate the grounds for his lawsuit and 

to respond to deadlines in a timely fashion. Thus, it appears that if Plaintiff has the problems he 

describes, he has been able to nonetheless, obtain the assistance needed to pursue this litigation.

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for

appointment of counsel is DENIED, without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 27, 2013 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01948-DAD-JLT Document 20 Filed 09/27/13 Page 2 of 2