Hymon v. Holthus ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 RODERICK L. HYMON, Case No. 2:23-cv-01764-MMD-BNW 4 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 5 MARY K. HOLTHUS, et al., 6 Defendants. 7 8 9 I. DISCUSSION 10 A. Plaintiff’s Address 11 According to the Clark County Detention Center (“CCDC”) inmate database, 12 Plaintiff is no longer being detained at CCDC. However, Plaintiff has not filed an updated 13 address with this Court. Under Nevada Local Rule of Practice IA 3-1, a “pro se party must 14 immediately file with the court written notification of any change of mailing address, email 15 address, telephone number, or facsimile number. The notification must include proof of 16 service on each opposing party or the party’s attorney. Failure to comply with this rule 17 may result in the dismissal of the action, entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as 18 deemed appropriate by the court.” Nev. Loc. R. IA 3-1. 19 Plaintiff shall file his updated address with this Court on or before September 20, 20 2024. If Plaintiff does not update the Court with his current address by September 20, 21 2024, this action will be subject to dismissal without prejudice. 22 B. Plaintiff’s Motion 23 Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that this case be consolidated with five other 24 cases, and that an attorney be appointed to negotiate a settlement of all six cases on his 25 behalf. (ECF No. 5). Plaintiff’s motion does not include any factual details or arguments 26 to support his requests. 27 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) provides that a court may consolidate the 28 actions if the actions “involve a common question of law or fact.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)(2). 1 A litigant does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in 42 U.S.C. § 2 1983 civil rights claims. Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981). 3 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), “[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any 4 person unable to afford counsel.” However, the court will appoint counsel for indigent civil 5 litigants only in “exceptional circumstances.” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th 6 Cir. 2009) (§ 1983 action). “When determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances’ exist, 7 a court must consider ‘the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the 8 petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues 9 involved.” Id. 10 Plaintiff does not make any argument that the cases he wishes to consolidate 11 involve a common question of law or fact. Rather, it appears that he is seeking 12 consolidation solely for the purposes of a global settlement. Furthermore, several of the 13 cases have already been dismissed based on Plaintiff’s failure to file an updated address. 14 Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel does not include any details or 15 argument to support the appointment of counsel, and the motion appears to be based 16 solely on the convenience of having an attorney negotiate a global settlement, rather than 17 Plaintiff’s ability to articulate his claims. This case is still at the screening stage, but an 18 initial review of the complaint does not support the existence of exceptional circumstances 19 warranting the appointment of counsel. Furthermore, several of Plaintiff’s cases have 20 already been dismissed for failure to file an updated address, and this case will also be 21 subject to dismissal unless Plaintiff files an updated address. 22 Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to consolidate cases and appoint counsel to negotiate 23 a settlement (ECF No. 5) is denied without prejudice. If Plaintiff files an updated address, 24 he may file a renewed motion to either consolidate cases or appoint counsel, explaining 25 why the request should be granted. 26 II. CONCLUSION 27 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file his updated address 28 with the Court on or before September 20, 2024. If Plaintiff does not file his updated 1| address by that deadline, this case will be subject to dismissal without prejudice. A dismissal without prejudice allows Plaintiff to refile the case with the Court, under a new case number. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion to consolidate cases and 5 | appoint counsel (ECF No. 5) is DENIED without prejudice. 6 7 DATED THIS 21 day of August 2024. . : Fig lath Le □□ 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-