(PC) Hill v. Newsom ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NATHAN HILL, No. 2:19-cv-1680 JAM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 24. In support of the 18 motion, plaintiff claims that the librarians at the prison law library are denying him access to 19 supplies, e.g., envelopes, paper. See id. He also asserts that his requests for legal research are not 20 being answered. See id. Plaintiff contends that these problems are affecting his access to the 21 courts and that they would be resolved if he had access to a paralegal. See id. 22 The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require 23 counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 24 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary 25 assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 26 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When 27 determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s 28 likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro 1 | se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 2 | (9th Cir. 2009) (finding district court did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). 3 || The burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. 4 The court notes that the instant action has yet to be screened and that plaintiff has filed a 5 || motion to amend the original complaint, which is also pending. See ECF No. 19. As a result the 6 || likelihood of plaintiff's success on the merits, as well as his ability to articulate his claims pro se, 7 || have yet to be determined. For these reasons, the court does not find the required exceptional 8 || circumstances at this time. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs request for the appointment of 10 || counsel (ECF No. 24) is DENIED. 11 | DATED: November 3, 2020 ~ 12 Chthien—Chare ALLISON CLAIRE 13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28