Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-03013/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-03013-0/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 

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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOHN A. RAMIREZ, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

P. PRICE, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-3013 AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, requests appointment 

of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to 

require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in Section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States 

Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court 

may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. 

Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 

(9th Cir. 1990). 

The test for exceptional circumstances requires the court to evaluate the plaintiff’s 

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. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 

1331 (9th Cir. 1986); Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Circumstances 

common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not 

Case 2:14-cv-03013-TLN-AC Document 8 Filed 01/15/15 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

establish exceptional circumstances supporting a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 

In the present case, plaintiff has completed a form request for appointment of counsel that 

contains no factors unique to this case. Thus, plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of 

demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel at this time. See 

Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating 

exceptional circumstances warranting appointment of counsel). Moreover, plaintiff’s request is 

premature, as he is required by separate order to submit additional information in support of his 

application to proceed in forma pauperis before the court may proceed to screen the merits of 

plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel, ECF No. 6, is denied without prejudice. 

 2. For the reasons stated in the court’s order filed concurrently with the instant order, the 

Clerk of Court is directed to serve this order on plaintiff at both his current and anticipated 

addresses, specifically: 

California State Prison, Corcoran 

P.O. Box 8800 

Corcoran CA 93212-8309 

 and 

 912 Multnomah Drive 

 Modesto CA 95350 

DATED: January 14, 2015 

Case 2:14-cv-03013-TLN-AC Document 8 Filed 01/15/15 Page 2 of 2