Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01590/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01590-1/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

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Shondel Larkin is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of 

the United States Magistrate Judge on October 28, 2016. Local Rule 302.

Currently before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion to submit exhibits, filed October 24, 2016, 

and Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel and motion to stay the proceedings, filed November 

16, 2016. 

I.

DISCUSSION

A. Motion to Submit Exhibits in Support of Complaint

Plaintiff requests to submit exhibits in support of his complaint. 

In determining whether a complaint states a cognizable claim for relief, the Court may consider 

materials attached as exhibits to the complaint and incorporated therein. Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 

SHONDEL LARKIN,

 Plaintiff,

v.

SHEBA SHIVER, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01590-SAB (PC)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO 

SUBMIT EXHIBITS, AND DENYING MOTION 

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND 

MOTION TO STAY THE PROCEEDINGS

[ECF Nos. 9, 10, 11]

Case 1:16-cv-01590-SAB Document 12 Filed 11/18/16 Page 1 of 3
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

250 F.3d 668, 688 (9th Cir. 2001); City of Fresno v. U.S., 709 F. Supp. 2d 888, 912 n.21 (E.D. Cal. 

2010). While it is not necessary for Plaintiff to submit exhibits in support of the allegations set forth 

in his complaint, the Court will grant Plaintiff’s request in this instance as Plaintiff has appropriately

referenced and incorporated the exhibits in his complaint. 

B. Motion for 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 any 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). 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 

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 on 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 

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. Plaintiff has thoroughly set forth his 

allegations in the complaint. However, 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. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion will be denied, without prejudice. 

C. Motion to Stay the Proceedings

Plaintiff requests that the Court stay the proceedings because he has been admitted to the 

Department of Mental Health to undergo mental health therapy. Plaintiff’s motion shall be denied, 

without prejudice. Plaintiff is advised that the Court is required to screen complaints brought by 

prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 

Case 1:16-cv-01590-SAB Document 12 Filed 11/18/16 Page 2 of 3
3

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

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court screens complaints in the order in which they are filed and strives to 

avoid delays whenever possible. However, there are numerous prisoner civil rights cases presently 

pending before the Court, and delays are inevitable despite the Court’s best efforts. Due to the heavy 

caseload, Plaintiff’s complaint is still awaiting screening. Thus, at the present time, there are no 

pending deadlines and no action by Plaintiff is necessary until the Court screens the complaint. 

Accordingly, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion to stay the proceedings, without prejudice.

II.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to submit exhibits is GRANTED;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, without prejudice; and

3. Plaintiff’s motion to stay the proceedings is DENIED, without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 18, 2016 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01590-SAB Document 12 Filed 11/18/16 Page 3 of 3