(PC) Parker v. Lynch ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MELVIN A. PARKER, No. 2:23-cv-0503 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 WARDEN JEFF LYNCH, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. 18 § 1983. Plaintiff requests that the court appoint Brian Dunn, The Cochran Firm, 4929 Wilshire 19 Blvd., Suite #1010, Los Angeles, CA 90010, as counsel for plaintiff. However, plaintiff provides 20 no documentation showing that Mr. Dunn has agreed to represent plaintiff. It is unclear whether 21 Mr. Dunn handles civil rights litigation. 22 District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 23 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional 24 circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 25 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. 26 Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether “exceptional 27 circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits as 28 well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 1 || legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court did not 2 || abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating exceptional 3 || circumstances is on the plaintiff. Id. Circumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of 4 || legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that 5 || warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 6 At present, there is no operative pleading on file; therefore, the court is unable to 7 || determine what the legal issues are or how complex they might be, and it is unclear whether it is 8 | likely plaintiff might succeed on the merits. 9 Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff failed to meet his 10 || burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel at this 11 | time. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for the appointment of 13 || counsel (ECF No. 13) is denied without prejudice. 14 || Dated: April 10, 2023 Aectl Aharon 16 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 fpark0503.31(2) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28