(PC) Lewis v. Ugwueze ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DARONTE T. LEWIS, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00596-AWI-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 13 v. ) APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 14 DR. KOKOR, ) (ECF No. 81) ) 15 Defendant. ) ) 16 ) 17 Plaintiff Daronta T. Lewis is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel filed on June 17, 20 2021. (ECF No. 81.) Plaintiff proffers that since May 31, 2021, he has been hospitalized due to right 21 hand trauma and cannot write. Plaintiff states he does not know the extent of the injury nor how long 22 he will be unable to write, and is requesting the appointment of counsel to assist with completing 23 discovery. 24 The Court notes that Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this 25 action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require any 26 attorney to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), Mallard v. United States District 27 Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). Nevertheless, in certain exceptional 28 circumstances, the Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to § 1915(e)(1). 1 || Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the 2 || Court will seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining 3 || whether “exceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of 4 || success on the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 5 || complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). “Neithe 6 || of these considerations is dispositive and instead must be viewed together.” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 7 || F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). The burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on Plaintiff. 8 || Id. 9 In light of the reasons proffered, the claims underlying this action, and the current scheduling 10 || order in this action, the Court does not find exceptional circumstances requiring appointment of 11 counsel. Specifically, the current deadlines in this action are: (1) an exhaustion motion filing deadlin 12 || of August 24, 2021; (2) a deadline to amend pleadings of November 24, 2021; (3) a discovery 13 || deadline of January 24, 2022; and (4) a dispositive motion filing deadline of April 4, 2022. CECF No 14 || 76.) Given Plaintiff has no knowledge of the extent of his injury or how long it will last, and the 15 || current deadlines, the Court finds a more appropriate remedy would be a reasonable extension of any 16 || relevant deadline, if the need presents itself in the future. 17 Accordingly, Plaintiff motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, without prejudice. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. A (re 20 pated: _ June 21, 2021 OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28