(PS) Narayan v. County of Sacramento ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PRAKASH NARAYAN, No. 2:19-cv-00466 TLN CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Presently pending before the court are pro se plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel and 18 motion for permanent injunction. (ECF Nos. 25, 26.) Neither motion has been properly noticed. 19 According to the Local Rules: 20 all motions shall be noticed on the motion calendar of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge. The moving party shall file a notice of 21 motion, motion, accompanying briefs, affidavits, if appropriate, and copies of all documentary evidence that the moving party intends to 22 submit in support of the motion. The matter shall be set for hearing on the motion calendar of the Judge or Magistrate Judge to whom the 23 action has been assigned or before whom the motion is to be heard not less than twenty-eight (28) days after service and filing of the 24 motion. 25 E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(b). 26 Moreover, on the present showing, the court does not find that appointment of counsel for 27 plaintiff is warranted in this matter. See Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 28 1986) (“counsel may be designated under [28 U.S.C.] section 1915(d) only in ‘exceptional 1 || circumstances’ ... [which] requires an evaluation of both ‘the likelihood of success on the merits 2 || [and] the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 3 || legal issues involved.’’’); see also Bradshaw v. Zoological Soc. of San Diego, 662 F.2d 1301, 4 | 1319 (9th Cir. 1981) Gn exercising discretion as to whether to appoint counsel in Title VII case 5 || under 42 U.S.C. § 2000-5((1)(B), a court should consider plaintiffs financial resources, efforts 6 || made by plaintiff to secure counsel, and whether plaintiff’s claims have merit). 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel (ECF 8 || No. 25) and plaintiff's motion for permanent injunction (ECF No. 26) are DENIED WITHOUT 9 | PREJUDICE. 7) ) ok 10 | Dated: August 6, 2019 ( WO A. it le / Pins 4 CAROLYNK.DELANEY 12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 |] 14.narayan.466.order 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28