Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_12-cv-04857/USCOURTS-cand-4_12-cv-04857-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
William Cordoba
Plaintiff
Silvia Pulido
Defendant

Document Text:

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 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

WILLIAM CORDOBA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SILVIA PULIDO, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 12-cv-04857-SBA (PR) 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR SANCTIONS; 

GRANTING HIS MOTION FOR 

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL; 

REFERRING PLAINTIFF TO 

FEDERAL PRO BONO PROJECT; AND 

STAYING PROCEEDINGS PENDING 

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

I. BACKGROUND 

Plaintiff William Cordoba, a state prisoner formerly incarcerated at San Quentin 

State Prison (“SQSP”), filed the instant pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983, alleging a claim of sexual harassment against his former supervisor, SQSP 

Vocational Janitorial Instructor Silvia Pulido (“Defendant”). Dkt. 1. The Court has 

determined that Defendant is not entitled to summary judgment on exhaustion grounds 

because there is a triable factual issue as to whether Plaintiff properly exhausted the 

administrative remedies that were available to him on his sexual harassment claim. Dkts. 

41, 68. The parties’ attempts to settle this matter have not been successful. Dkt. 78. 

Therefore, this matter will be set for trial. 

Before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, motion for appointment of 

counsel, and motion to compel discovery. Dkts. 76, 88, 90. 

II. DISCUSSION 

A. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

In his motion for sanctions, Plaintiff requests the Court to issue “the appropriate 

sanctions” on Defendant’s attorney on the grounds that defense counsel did not appear for 

a telephonic status conference to discuss settlement proceedings before Magistrate Judge 

Nandor Vadas on November 17, 2015. Dkt. 76 at 2-3. The record shows that, in fact, 

Case 4:12-cv-04857-SBA Document 92 Filed 03/28/16 Page 1 of 4
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

defense counsel called in to attend the November 17, 2015 telephonic status conference; 

however, Plaintiff was not able to join the call. Serra Decl. ¶¶ 3-4. The record further 

shows that the complications leading to Plaintiff’s inability to join the November 17, 2015 

telephonic status conference were technical in nature, and that defense counsel took steps 

to rectify the situation. Dkt. 80 at 2-3; Serra Decl. ¶¶ 3-6; Wooley Decl. ¶¶ 3-7. 

Thereafter, the parties were successful in their attempts to have another telephone 

conference, but Judge Vadas was no longer available. Dkt. 80 at 3. Defense counsel and 

Plaintiff were then able to meet and confer over the phone along with a representative of 

the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation prior to the settlement 

conference, as required by Judge Vadas. Id. at 3; Serra Decl. ¶ 6. The parties met for a 

settlement conference on December 9, 2015; however, as noted, the case did not settle. 

Dkt. 78. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions is DENIED. Dkt. 78. 

B. MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

“Generally, a person has no right to counsel in civil actions. . . . However, a court 

may under ‘exceptional circumstances’ appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (citation 

omitted). To determine “exceptional circumstances” are present, “a court must consider 

‘the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate 

his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Id. In 

determining whether exceptional circumstances exist, “[a] district court must determine 

whether a) there is a likelihood of success on the merits; and b) the prisoner is unable to 

articulate his claims in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Cano v. 

Taylor, 739 F.3d 1214, 1218 (9th Cir. 2014). Based on the record presented, the Court 

finds that the appointment of counsel is appropriate. Therefore, the Court exercises its 

discretion to GRANT Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel. Dkt. 88. 

Case 4:12-cv-04857-SBA Document 92 Filed 03/28/16 Page 2 of 4
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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California

III. CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions is DENIED. Dkt. 76. 

2. Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel is GRANTED. Dkt. 88. 

3. Having determined that it would be beneficial to have counsel assist Plaintiff 

in this matter, and good and just cause appearing, the Court hereby REFERS the action to 

the Federal Pro Bono Project (“Project”) to secure pro bono counsel to represent Plaintiff 

in this action, in the manner set forth below: 

 a. The Clerk of the Court shall forward the Referral Order to the 

appropriate Project office, San Francisco or San Jose, determined by whether 

the referring judge is located in the San Francisco/Oakland or San Jose 

division. The scope of this referral shall be for: 

X all purposes for the duration of the case 

 the limited purpose of representing the litigant in the course of 

 mediation 

 early neutral evaluation 

 settlement conference 

 briefing and hearing on the following motion (e.g., motion for 

summary judgment or motion to dismiss): 

_________________________________________________________ 

 discovery as follows: 

_________________________________________________________ 

 other: 

_________________________________________________________ 

 b. Upon being notified by the Project that an attorney has been located to 

represent Plaintiff, that attorney shall be appointed as counsel for Plaintiff in this matter for 

the scope of representation described above. If the appointment of counsel is for limited 

purposes, the Court shall issue an order relieving the volunteer attorney from the limited 

representation of the litigant once those purposes have been fulfilled. 

 c. The instant action is temporarily STAYED and administratively 

Case 4:12-cv-04857-SBA Document 92 Filed 03/28/16 Page 3 of 4
4 

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

closed until the Court is informed by the Project that counsel has been secured and 

appointed by the Court. Upon the appointment of counsel, the action will be reopened, the 

case will continue to be stayed until four (4) weeks from the date an attorney is appointed 

to represent Plaintiff, and a Case Management Conference will be scheduled. 

4. Plaintiff’s remaining motion to compel discovery is DENIED without 

prejudice to refiling after counsel has been appointed for Plaintiff. Dkt. 90. 

5. This Order terminates Docket Nos. 76, 88, and 90. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 3/28/16 ______________________________ 

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG 

Senior United States District Judge 

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\CR.12\Cordoba4857.GrantAtty&ReferFPBP&AddressMots.docx 

Case 4:12-cv-04857-SBA Document 92 Filed 03/28/16 Page 4 of 4