IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 7, 2012
WILLIE SCHOBY, PLAINTIFF,
P. PINKERTON, DEFENDANT.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 28, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file an opposition to defendant's August 17, 2012 motion for summary judgment. Good cause appearing, plaintiff's motion will be granted.
On August 29, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's August 28, 2012 motion for an extension of time is granted;
2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file an opposition to defendant's August 17, 2012 motion for summary judgment;
3. Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed and served not later than fourteen days thereafter; and
4. Plaintiff's August 29, 2012 motion for appointment of counsel is denied.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.