UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 10, 2012
DR. REEVES, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AS MOOT (Doc. 20)
On June 11, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require an attorney to represent Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 1816 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525.
Counsel for Plaintiff has already been appointed in the present case for the limited purpose of drafting and filing an amended complaint. (Doc. 19.) The only action pending in this case is the filing of an amended complaint on Plaintiff's behalf such that her motion for appointment of counsel at this time is moot. *fn1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel, filed on June 11, 2012 (Doc. 20), is DENIED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.