Amazon.com Inc v. Grato International

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AT SEATTLE

AMAZON.COM, INC., et al., CASE NO. 2:22-cv-01205-RSL Plaintiffs, v.

GRATO INTERNATIONAL, et al., ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL Defendants.

This matter comes before the Court on defendant Rizwa Iqbal’s second letter request for court-appointed counsel. Dkt. # 65. Generally, a person has no right to counsel in civil actions. See Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981). However, a court may under “exceptional circumstances” appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Agyeman v. Corrs. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, a court must consider “the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Neither of these considerations is dispositive and instead must be viewed together. Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986).

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). In addition, the party seeking appointment of counsel must show indigency. Mr. Iqbal has produced evidence of indigency and confirms that he is unable to afford legal representation to defend himself in this matter. Plaintiffs, Amazon.com and World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., have accused Mr. Iqbal of trademark counterfeiting, trademark infringement, copyright infringement, false advertising, and false designation of origin in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1121, breach of contract, and unfair and deceptive acts in violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act. While the factual allegations regarding the conduct alleged are not complicated, intellectual property is a challenging area of law even those who have legal training. Mr. Iqbal asserts that he does not have the legal knowledge or ability to understand the claims brought against him or to respond appropriately. Unfortunately, Mr. Iqbal’s situation is not “exceptional.” Amazon.com and its vendors have filed approximately 100 trademark and copyright infringement actions in this District, suing hundreds, if not thousands, of entities and individuals like Mr. Iqbal, many of whom are equally impecunious, reside outside the United States, and are equally unfamiliar with the relevant law. This District does not have the resources to provide counsel to all pro se litigants and generally reserves court-appointed representation for those claiming that their civil rights have been violated. See General Order 07-23 (adopting an amended Plan for the Representation of Pro Se Litigants in Civil Rights Actions). ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF The request for court-appointed counsel is therefore DENIED.

DATED this 12th day of May, 2025.

A

Robert S. Lasnik United States Distric t Judge ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF