1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 MICHAEL HANDY, 4 Case No. 20-cv-00305-YGR (PR) Plaintiff, 5 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S v. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 6 FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT; J. TAYLOR, et al., 7 GRANTING IN PART HIS REQUEST FOR Defendants. COPY OF COMPLAINT; DENYING HIS 8 REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPTS; AND DENYING HIS REQUEST FOR 9 APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

10

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed the instant pro se prisoner complaint under 42 U.S.C. 11 § 1983. Before the Court are Plaintiff’s motions, including the following: (1) his motion for an 12 extension of time to file his amended complaint; (2) motion for a copy of the complaint; 13 (3) motion for transcripts; and (4) motion for appointment of counsel. See Dkt. 19. 14 I. MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE HIS AMENDED COMPLAINT 15 The Court has dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend. Plaintiff has filed a 16 request for extension of time to file his amended complaint. 17 Good cause appearing, the request is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file his amended 18 complaint on or by September 30, 2020. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint by the 19 deadline above, this action will be dismissed without prejudice. 20 II. MOTION FOR A COPY OF THE COMPLAINT 21 Plaintiff’s motion for a copy of the complaint is only GRANTED in part. The Clerk of the 22 Court is directed to copy pages 1 through 15 of his complaint and send them to Plaintiff along 23 with his copy of this Order. Plaintiff must pay for the xerox copying of all other pages of the 24 complaint, including all attached exhibits. The Clerk shall enclose a form for Plaintiff to request 25 any additional copies and make a payment for such copies. Plaintiff may submit the enclosed 26 form requesting copies and make payments for any additional documents to the Clerk. Once 27 II. REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPTS

5 Plaintiff also asks the Court to order the state court to provide him with copies of the

3 transcripts from People v. Handy, Del Norte County Superior Court Case No. CRPB 19-5099 “at

4 no charge.” Dkt. 19 at9. The Court cannot order the state court to provide free copies of

5 transcripts to Plaintiff. Nor can this Court pay for such transcripts. Although the Court granted 6 Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis, “‘the expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an

5 indigent litigant] is proper only when authorized by Congress.’” Tedder v. Odel,

,

3 211 (9th Cir. 1989) (quoting United States v. MacCollom,

(1976). The

9 expenditure of public funds for such transcripts is not authorized by the in forma pauperis statute

0 or any other statute. See

. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request for transcripts is DENIED. 11 IV. MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL E B Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED for want of exceptional 4 circumstances. See Rand v. Rowland,

(9th Cir. 1997); see also Lassiter v.

3 5 Dep’t of Social Services,

(1981) (there is no constitutional right to counsel in a 6 civil case). This denial is without prejudice to the Court’s sua sponte appointment of counsel at a 5 future date should the circumstances of this case warrant such appointment. 8 This Order terminates Docket No. 19.

19 IT IS SO ORDERED.

30 Dated: September 4, 2020

71 are conZALEZ ROGERS 3 United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28