(PC) Bishop v. Dodson

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA TOR AHMADD BISHOP, No. 2:20-cv-2032-EFB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER G. DODSON, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. He requests that the court assist him and/or appoint counsel. The court cannot assist plaintiff in the form of legal advice. The court will remind plaintiff, however, that he must filed a second amended complaint as originally ordered on February 4, 2021, ECF No. 22, and extended on March 4, 2021, ECF No. 26.

22 District courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily to represent such a plaintiff. See 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). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues || mvolved. Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). Having considered those factors, || the court finds there are no exceptional circumstances in this case.

3 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs request for court assistance/appointment of | counsel (ECF No. 27) is DENIED.

5 || DATED: March 30, 2021. $ Yo lj (Fa g 6 EDMUND F. BRENNAN 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1]