1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

FENGEMI LI, Case No. 09-11363

Plaintiff, Stephen J. Murphy, III

vs. United States District Judge

RECELLULAR, INC., Michael Hluchaniuk

United States Magistrate Judge

Defendant.

 /

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (Dkt. 16)

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for appointment of

counsel. (Dkt. 16). Plaintiff brings this action against defendant claiming

violations the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, Title VII, the Whistleblower

Protection Act, and the Whistleblower Protection Act under the Solid Waste

Disposition Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, and various other state and federal

statutes and Michigan common law. (Dkt. 1). An order granting plaintiff’s

application to proceed in forma pauperis and directing service of process on

defendant was entered on April 17, 2009. (Dkt. 4). On April 23, 2009, District

Judge Steven J. Murphy, III, referred this matter to the undersigned for all pretrial

purposes. (Dkt. 10). 

2:09-cv-11363-SJM-MJH Doc # 20 Filed 07/07/09 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 122
2

Plaintiff previously filed an application for the appointment of counsel on

April 10, 2009. (Dkt. 3). While plaintiff completed the financial affidavit in

support of her application for the appointment of counsel, she provided no reasons

in support of her request, and the Court denied her request. (Dkt. 12). Plaintiff has

filed a second motion for the appointment of counsel, citing her difficulties with

speaking and understanding English, among other issues. (Dkt. 16). The Court

cautions plaintiff that even if she can show good cause for the Court to appoint

counsel, such an appointment is not automatic. Finding an attorney willing to take

a court appointment is a difficult, lengthy, and often fruitless process. 

Moreover, plaintiff has not described her good faith efforts to exhaustively

find counsel. The Court previously gave plaintiff telephone numbers for the State

Bar of Michigan and Washtenaw County attorney referral services and suggested

that she obtain an interpreter. In order for the Court to evaluate plaintiff’s second

request for the appointment of counsel, plaintiff must describe, in detail, all of her

efforts to obtain counsel and an interpreter. Plaintiff must file a document setting

forth this information by July 21, 2009.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The parties to this action may object to and seek review of this Order, but are

required to file any objections within 10 days of service as provided for in 28

2:09-cv-11363-SJM-MJH Doc # 20 Filed 07/07/09 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 123
3

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 72.1(d)(2). A party may not assign as error any

defect in this Order to which timely objection was not made. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a). 

Any objections are required to specify the part of the Order to which the party

objects and state the basis of the objection. Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1(d)(2), any

objections must be served on this Magistrate Judge.

s/Michael Hluchaniuk 

Date: July 7, 2009 Michael Hluchaniuk

United States Magistrate Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on July 7, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing paper with

the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system, which will send electronic

notification to the following: F. Arthur Jones, II and Melvin J. Muskovitz, and I

certify that I mailed by United States Postal Service the paper to the following

non-ECF participant: Fengmei Li, 3092 Village Circle, Ann Arbor, MI 48108.

s/James P. Peltier 

Courtroom Deputy Clerk

U.S. District Court

600 Church Street

Flint, MI 48502

(810) 341-7850

pete_peltier@mied.uscourts.gov

2:09-cv-11363-SJM-MJH Doc # 20 Filed 07/07/09 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 124