(PC) Mendez v. United States of America ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FELIPE MENDEZ, JR., Case No.: 1:17-cv-00555-LJO-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL AND 14 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., SPANISH INTERPRETER; 15 Defendants. (2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXPAND PAGE LIMITS, 16 (3) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 17 FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, AND 18 (4) DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO SUBMIT AMENDED REPLY 19 WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS 20 (Docs. 52, 62, 64) 21 14-DAY DEADLINE 22 Plaintiff has filed a motion to expand page limits for his opposition to defendants’ motion 23 for summary judgment. Defendants oppose the motion, and plaintiff seeks an extension of time to 24 file his reply to that opposition. Plaintiff’s motion to expand will be granted, and his related 25 request for an extension of time will be denied as moot. 26 Also pending is a request by plaintiff for appointment of counsel and a Spanish 27 interpreter. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. 28 1 § 1983, and district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in 2 section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In 3 exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a 4 plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); 5 Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether 6 “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the 7 merits and his ability to articulate his claims in light of the complexity of the legal issues 8 involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court did not abuse 9 discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating exceptional 10 circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of 11 legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that 12 warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. Having considered the factors under 13 Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional 14 circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel at this time. Similarly, the court is unable to 15 provide plaintiff with an interpreter. Plaintiff must seek assistance at the prison if he cannot 16 complete his court filings in English on his own. Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 356 (1996). 17 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: 18 1. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel and motion for Spanish interpreter (Doc. 19 52) is DENIED; 20 2. Plaintiff’s motion to expand page limits (Doc. 62) is GRANTED; 21 3. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time (Doc. 64) is DENIED as moot; and 22 4. Defendants may file an amended reply to their motion for summary judgment within 23 fourteen days from the date of this order. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: December 4, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28