(PC) Smith v. Uzma

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DONALD JOSHUA SMITH, Case No. 2:24-cv-0683-TLN-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CHAUDHRY UZMA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 Plaintiff has filed a motion for extension of time to file a second amended complaint and two 19 motions to appoint counsel. ECF Nos. 17, 18, & 19. Good cause appearing, his motion for time 20 is granted, but his motions for counsel are denied. 21 District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 22 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional 23 circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily represent such a plaintiff. See 28 24 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. 25 Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). When determining whether “exceptional 26 circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits as 27 well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the 28 legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court did not 1 | abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The burden of demonstrating exceptional 2 || circumstances is on the plaintiff. /d. Circumstances common to most prisoners, such as lack of 3 | legal education and limited law library access, do not establish exceptional circumstances that 4 | warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 5 Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to 6 | meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of 7 | counsel at this time. 8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 9 1. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time, ECF No. 18, is granted; 10 2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file a second 11 amended complaint; and 12 3. Plaintiff's motions to appoint counsel, ECF Nos. 17 & 19, are denied without 13 || prejudice. 14 1s IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 | q Sty — Dated: _ November 27, 2024 17 JEREMY D. PETERSON 18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28