Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03308/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03308-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 18:1964 Racketeering (RICO) 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KIAN R. MCCARTHY,

Plaintiff,

v.

MEGAN J. BRENNAN,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-03308-JSC 

ORDER DENYING IFP APPLICATION

AND MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 2, 3

Plaintiff Kian McCarthy (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, brings this action against Megan 

J. Brennan in her capacity as Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service 

(“Defendant”). Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and 

Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dkt. Nos. 2, 3.) 

The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 

U.S.C. § 1915. (Dkt. No. 2.) In his financial affidavit, Plaintiff lists a bank account, but the 

balance is low, as well as significant debt stemming from prior legal fees, dental care expenses, 

and other substantial financial obligations. But Plaintiff also states that he is presently employed,

has other sources of income including a thrift savings plan, and owns a $1,000,000 home as well 

as a car. On the whole, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has sufficient assets to pay the $400 fee 

to file an action. Plaintiff shall pay the filing fee on or before August 10, 2015. Failure to 

comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to 

prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

Plaintiff also requests the appointment of counsel based on his indigent status. (Dkt. No. 

3.) Plaintiff provides no other justification for the appointment of counsel. District courts have 

discretion to ‘request’ that an attorney represent indigent civil litigants upon a showing of 

Case 3:15-cv-03308-JSC Document 7 Filed 07/24/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

exceptional circumstances. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Agyeman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 

1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004) (“The decision to appoint such counsel is within the sound discretion 

of the trial court and is granted only in exceptional circumstances.”). Here, the Court has already 

concluded that Plaintiff does not qualify as indigent for the purposes of proceeding in this action 

IFP. Nor has Plaintiff demonstrated that “exceptional circumstances” warrant appointment of 

counsel. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel.

The Court encourages Plaintiff to seek free assistance from the Northern District’s Pro Se 

Help Desk, United States Courthouse, San Francisco, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, 15th Floor, Room 

2796, San Francisco, CA 94102 or the Help Desk at the Oakland Federal Courthouse, 1301 Clay 

Street, 4th Floor, Room 470S, Oakland, CA 94612. Appointments can be made in person or by 

calling 415-782-8982.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 24, 2015

________________________

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-03308-JSC Document 7 Filed 07/24/15 Page 2 of 2