(PC) Hackworth v. Arevalos ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT HACKWORTH, JR., Case No. 1:19-cv-01362-NONE-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AND 13 v. DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT 14 E. AREVALOS, et al., COUNSEL 15 Defendant. (Docs. 54, 55) 16 17 Plaintiff has filed a third motion for judgment on the grounds of evidence tampering. 18 (Doc. 54.) This motion is substantively similar to the two prior motions for judgment, which 19 were denied. (See Doc. 41, 45.) Plaintiff again has not demonstrated that he is entitled to 20 judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54 or summary judgment under Rule 56. 21 Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for judgment. (Doc. 54.) 22 Plaintiff has also filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. (Doc. 55.) Plaintiff 23 does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 24 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require an attorney to represent Plaintiff 25 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 26 296, 298 (1989). The Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel under section 27 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. However, without a reasonable method of securing and 28 compensating counsel, the Court will seek volunteer counsel only in the most serious and 1 exceptional cases. In determining whether exceptional circumstances exist, the district court 2 must evaluate both the likelihood of success of the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to 3 articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Id. 4 Plaintiff’s motion does not indicate exceptional circumstances that warrant appointment 5 of counsel. Even assuming that Plaintiff is not well-versed in the law and that he has made 6 serious allegations, which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This 7 Court is faced with similar cases almost daily. At this stage in the proceedings, the Court cannot 8 determine that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits. Moreover, based on a review of the 9 record, the Court finds that Plaintiff can articulate his claims adequately. Id. For the foregoing 10 reasons, the Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of 11 counsel. (Doc. 55.) 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 Dated: September 27, 2021 _ /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28