Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01839/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01839-6/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DION ANDERSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

JERRY BROWN, et al,

Defendants.

1:12-cv-01839 AWI DLB (PC) 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 

[ECF No. 33]

ORDER STRIKING MOTION FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME

[ECF No. 34]

Plaintiff Dion Anderson (“Plaintiff”) is prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 25, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the 

appointment of counsel. Also on September 25, 2014, a motion for an extension of time was 

erroneously filed in this case.

I. Motion for the 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 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-01839-AWI-DLB Document 35 Filed 02/02/15 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

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

Aexceptional 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 is 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. This court is faced with 

similar cases almost daily. Further, at this 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. 

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff=s motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY 

DENIED, without prejudice.

II. Motion for Extension of Time

On September 25, 2014, a motion for extension of time was filed in this case. However, 

the motion was erroneously filed since it pertains to another plaintiff in another case. Therefore,

the motion will be STRICKEN.

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1) Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 33] is DENIED, without 

prejudice; and

2) The motion for extension of time [ECF No. 34] is STRICKEN.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 2, 2015 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01839-AWI-DLB Document 35 Filed 02/02/15 Page 2 of 2