(PC) Mora v. Williams ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUBEN EDWARD MORA, Case No. 2:20-cv-00746-KJM-JDP (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL 13 v. ECF No. 46 14 H. WILLIAMS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff has moved for the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 46. Plaintiff does not have 19 a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, see Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 20 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court lacks the authority to require an attorney to represent plaintiff. 21 See Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). The court can 22 request the voluntary assistance of counsel. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (“The court may request 23 an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel”); Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. But 24 without a means to compensate counsel, the court will seek volunteer counsel only in exceptional 25 circumstances. In determining whether such circumstances exist, “the district court must evaluate 26 both the likelihood of success on the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his 27 claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525 28 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 1 Having considered these factors, I cannot conclude that exceptional circumstances 2 || requiring the appointment of counsel are present here. 3 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel, 4 | ECF No. 46, is denied without prejudice. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 ( — Dated: _ September 14, 2022 Q————. 8 awe D. PE i ERSON 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28