Source: http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20071123_0001087.SCA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2018-03-23 17:08:40
Document Index: 257403060

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1915', '§ 1983', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915']

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) [Doc. No. 45]
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis ("IFP") with a civil rights Complaint [Doc. No. 1] filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and currently incarcerated at Ironwood State Correctional Facility, has submitted a motion in which he requests that the Court appoint counsel for him pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) [Doc. No. 45].
Here, it appears that Plaintiff has a sufficient grasp of his case, the legal issues involved, and is able to adequately articulate the basis of his claims. In fact, Plaintiff's pro se pleading has survived the initial screening provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b), and the Court's docket reflects that Plaintiff has effected service Complaint to which Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No.47]. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).
Accordingly, under the circumstances of this case, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to show the "exceptional circumstances" required for appointment of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) and therefore DENIES without prejudice Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) [Doc. No. 45].