Alfarag v. DeJoy

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 MAJID ALFARAG, CASE NO. 2:22-cv-1745 11 Plaintiff, ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 12 v. 14 Defendant. 15 16 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s 17 Order Requesting Counsel. (Dkt. No. 11.) The Court has reviewed the Motion and all relevant 18 material and DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion. 20 Plaintiff brought an Employment Discrimination claim for acts allegedly perpetrated 21 against him by managers while he was employed at the United States Postal Service. Plaintiff 22 was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and previously brought a motion for Court 23 24 1 appointed counsel, which the Court denied. (See Dkt. No. 10.) Plaintiff now asks the Court to 2 reconsider that decision. 4 Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior 5 ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence. 6 Local Rule 7(h)(1). 7 It is well established that “[t]he decision to appoint counsel in a civil suit is one of 8 discretion and a district court’s determination will be overturned only for abuse of that 9 discretion.” Cano v. Taylor, 739 F.3d 1214, 1218 (9th Cir. 2014) (internal citation omitted). The 10 court must consider whether there is a “likelihood of success on the merits” and whether “the 11 [plaintiff] is unable to articulate his claims in light of the complexity of the legal issues 12 involved.” Id. 13 Plaintiff argues that he sought legal counsel prior to filing his claim but was unable to 14 retain an attorney. (Mot. for Reconsideration at 3.) He further contends that due to financial 15 hardships he is unable to hire an attorney to take his case. (Id.) While the Court sympathizes with 16 Plaintiff, an inability to secure an attorney prior to filing a claim does not entitle plaintiffs to 17 court appointed counsel. The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion. 18 The Court understands that navigating federal court can be difficult to do by oneself and 19 directs Plaintiff to utilize the resources available at the Western District of Washington’s 20 “Representing Yourself (‘Pro Se’)” web page located here: 21 https://www.wawd.uscourts.gov/representing-yourself-pro-se. 22 // 23 // 24 1 The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel. 2 Dated March 8, 2023. A 3 4 Marsha J. Pechman United States Senior District Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23