McClellon v. Illa

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: May 7, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-00609
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3

4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 DONTE JAMAL MCCLELLON, CASE NO. 25-cv-00609-JHC 8

Plaintiff, 9 ORDER v. 10 STEPHAN ILLA, 11 Defendant. 12 13

14 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Pro Se Motion for Appointment of Pro Bono Counsel.” 15 Dkt. 7. Because Plaintiff has not shown that exceptional circumstances warrant appointment of 16 counsel in this civil case, the Court DENIES the application. 17 There is no right to counsel in civil actions. See Campbell v. Burt, 141 F.3d 927, 931 18 (9th Cir. 1998). A court may appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants under 28 U.S.C. 19 § 1915(e)(1), but only if there are “exceptional circumstances.” Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. 20 of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004). To determine if “exceptional circumstances” exist, 21 the Court considers “the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the [plaintiff] 22 to articulate [their] claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” 23 Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983) (per curiam). Plaintiff has not shown that 24 l extraordinary circumstances warrant appointment of counsel: Plaintiff shows neither an inability 2 || to articulate his claims pro se in light of the issues involved nor the likelihood of the claims’ 3 success. ! 4 Thus, the Court DENIES the motion. 5 Dated this 7th day of May, 2025. ° CTok~ 4. Chur 7 John H. Chun United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ' The motion states that a declaration is “attached.” Dkt. #7 at 1. But no declaration was filed 24 with the motion. See generally Dkt. #7.