Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-05190/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-05190-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

VINTON FROST,

Plaintiff,

v.

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ATTORNEY, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-05190-EMC 

ORDER PARTIALLY GRANTING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR 

ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF AND 

DENYING MOTION FOR 

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Docket Nos. 18, 25

Mr. Vinton Frost is a pro se plaintiff who filed a case against the Office of the U.S. 

Attorney and the U.S. Department of Justice. See Docket No. 1. He has filed several motions for 

administrative relief, see Docket Nos. 18 and 25, as well as a motion requesting appointment of 

counsel, see Docket No. 18. 

First, Mr. Frost seeks the creation of a document archive to safeguard Exhibits A–F, which 

accompany his first motion for administrative relief. See Docket No. 18 at 4. The Court DENIES

this request because any and all documents filed as part of Mr. Frost’s case (even manually filed 

documents such as those identified for safeguarding by Mr. Frost) automatically become part of 

the Court’s Electronic Case Filing (“ECF”) system and the permanent record of the case. As is 

noted on the Court’s website: removing an e-filed document is “a drastic measure” and such an 

action is typically “reserved for [mistakenly filed] documents whose contents are confidential.”

1

 

Thus, Mr. Frost is assured that all the documents he has filed, not only those exhibits which he 

 

1

See Correcting E-Filing Mistakes, U.S. DISTRICT COURT – N.D. CAL., 

https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/cases-e-filing/cm-ecf/support-and-troubleshooting/correcting-efiling-mistakes/#SENSITIVE (last visited Dec. 3, 2019).

Case 3:19-cv-05190-EMC Document 29 Filed 12/09/19 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

wants specially safeguarded, have already been preserved through the Court’s ECF system.

Second, Mr. Frost seeks the appointment of counsel. See Docket No. 18 at 4. A district 

court has the discretion under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(1) to designate counsel to represent an indigent 

civil litigant in exceptional circumstances. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th 

Cir. 1986). This requires “an evaluation of 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. “Neither of these factors is dispositive and both must be viewed together before 

deciding on a request for counsel.” Id. Exceptional circumstances are not present at this time 

because Mr. Frost has not yet submitted a sufficiently detailed pleading that shows any likelihood 

of success on the merits. Mr. Frost’s request for appointment of counsel to represent him in this 

action therefore is DENIED.

Finally, Mr. Frost seeks an order from the Court allowing his use of the Attorney Lounge 

of the 18th Floor of the Phillip Burton Federal Building. As noted on the Court’s website, judges 

may permit non-attorneys to use the attorney lounge “on specified dates and at specified times.”2 

Typically, judges have permitted use of the lounge only on days when a non-attorney has a 

hearing scheduled in his or her case. As a result, the Court GRANTS Mr. Frost’s request for an 

order permitting his one-time use of the Attorney Lounge, but that use is limited to January 23, 

2020 between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. 

This order disposes of Docket Nos. 18 and 25. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 9, 2019

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

 

2

See Attorney Lounges, U.S. DISTRICT COURT – N.D. CAL., 

https://cand.uscourts.gov/attorneys/attorney-lounges/ (last visited Dec. 3, 2019). 

Case 3:19-cv-05190-EMC Document 29 Filed 12/09/19 Page 2 of 2