(PC) Arocha v. Diaz ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 1] RUDY AROCHA, No. 2:22-cv-0638 KJM CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 Vv. ORDER 14 RALPH M. DIAZ, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to file a motion for an award of attorney’s 18 || fees. To the extent plaintiff seeks attorney’s fees under provisions of California law, such 19 || provisions are not applicable in this court. To the extent plaintiff seeks attorney’s fees pursuant to 20 | 28 U.S.C. § 1988, pro se litigants are not entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under that statute. 21 | Kay v. Ehrler, 499 U.S. 432, 435 (1991). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 22 | plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file a motion for an award of attorney’s fees (ECF 23 || No. 17) 1s denied. 24 | Dated: March 24, 2023 □□ I / dip Ze 25 CAROLYNK. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 | 4 28 aroc0638.fees