(PC) Bowell v. Montoya ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES BOWELL, 1:17-cv-00605-NONE-GSA-PC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 13 vs. (ECF No. 69.) 14 F. MONTOYA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 On June 29, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. Plaintiff does not 19 have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 20 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require an attorney to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 21 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 22 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the Court may request 23 the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. 24 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the court will seek 25 volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 26 “exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success 27 of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 28 complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 1 Plaintiff argues that he needs appointed counsel “because of the Worldwide Covid-19 2 pandemic obstructing his opportunities to review critical material evidence.” (ECF No. 1.) These 3 conditions do not make Plaintiff’s case exceptional under the law. At this stage of the 4 proceedings it is too early to determine whether Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits. The 5 court finds that Plaintiff can adequately articulate his claim. Plaintiff’s claims, for retaliation, due 6 process, and failure to protect Plaintiff, are not complex. Therefore, Plaintiff’s request for 7 appointment of counsel shall be denied, without prejudice to renewal of the motion at a later 8 stage of the proceedings. 9 Therefore, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel 10 be DENIED, without prejudice. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 13 Dated: July 10, 2020 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28