Marcos Miguel Rangel v. California Rehabilation Center

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARCOS MIGUEL RANGEL, Case No. 5:21-cv-00466-DMG-AFM 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS 13 v. AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE CALIFORNIA REHABILITATION JUDGE CENTER, et al., 16 Defendants.

18 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge and has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Plaintiff has objected. The Court accepts and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. The Court also denies Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel because he has failed to show a likelihood of success on his claims or extraordinary circumstances. See, e.g., Agyeman v. Corrs. Corp. of America, 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004) (decision to appoint counsel is within “the sound discretion of the trial court and is granted only in exceptional circumstances”) (internal quotation marks omitted).

27 /// /// 1 IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered (1) dismissing the || First Amended Complaint without further leave to amend, and (2) dismissing this || action with prejudice for failure to state a claim.

5 || DATED: December 20, 2021 Kel, M.GEE 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE