(PC) Young v. Rodriguez ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANNY GEROME YOUNG, No. 2:15-cv-2604 KJM CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 RODRIGUEZ, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 63.) The United States 18 Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent 19 prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In 20 certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the voluntary assistance of 21 counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 22 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). 23 “When determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances’ exist, a court must consider ‘the 24 likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims 25 pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 26 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)). The burden 27 of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances common to 28 most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish 1 | exceptional circumstances that would warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 2 Plaintiff requests counsel to assist him now that defendants’ motion for summary 3 | judgment has been denied and asserts that he is not educated in examining witnesses or raising 4 | timely objections. (ECF No. 63.) Plaintiff has shown himself capable of articulating his claims 5 | without assistance, and it is not yet clear that this case will proceed to trial as it is currently 6 | scheduled for a settlement conference. Accordingly, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the 7 || necessary extraordinary circumstances for appointment of counsel. In the event the settlement 8 | conference is not successful and this case is set for trial, plaintiff may renew his request for 9 | appointment of counsel. 10 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs request for the appointment of 11 | counsel (ECF No. 63) is denied. ae id Sag Dated: August 21, 2019 CA rd / Lz o~-, CAROLYN K. DELANEY 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 6 13:youn2604.31 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28