(PC) Jaramillo v. Tappan ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUDIE A. JARAMILLO, No. 2:22-cv-0075-WBS-EFB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 T. TAPPAN et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. He requests that the court appoint him counsel. 19 District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 20 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional 21 circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. See 22 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. 23 Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether “exceptional 24 circumstances” exist, the court must consider the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the 25 ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues 26 involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). Having considered those factors, 27 the court finds there are no exceptional circumstances in this case. 28 ///// ] Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel 2 | (ECF No. 18) 1s DENIED. 3 || Dated: April 21, 2022. : □□ PDEA 5 EDMUND F. BRENNAN 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28