(PC) Coleman v. Spearman ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RODNEY V. COLEMAN, No. 2:19-cv-0369 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 M.E. SPEARMAN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, asks the court to 18 reconsider its denial of his motion to appoint counsel filed March 2022. See ECF Nos. 30, 33, 35. 19 The court construes the filing as a second motion for the appointment of counsel. 20 In support of the motion, plaintiff states that the appointment of counsel is warranted 21 because prison officials have not allowed him to receive a special typewriter that better assists 22 him with his ADA needs, in violation of their own rules and regulations. In addition, plaintiff 23 anticipates that extensive daily programming at the prison will limit his ability to respond to 24 court-ordered deadlines in a timely manner. ECF No. 35. 25 In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the voluntary 26 assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 27 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). To date, plaintiff 28 has filed documents and responded to court orders in a largely timely and satisfactory manner. 1 | Moreover, the fact that prison officials are not following their own rules and regulations does not 2 || provide a basis for relief. The challenges that plaintiff faces do not constitute extraordinary 3 || circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for the appointment of 5 || counsel (ECF No. 35) is DENIED. 6 || DATED: May 19, 2022 ~ 7 Lhar—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28