Rangel v. Williams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN RANGEL, Case No. 21-cv-00278-JSC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR v. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND

FOR ADDITIONAL LAW LIBRARY

V. WILLIAMS, et al., ACCESS

Defendants. Re: Dkt. Nos. 8, 10

Plaintiff, a California prisoner, filed this civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has filed a motion for appointment of counsel. There is no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case. Lassiter v. Dep't of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). 28 U.S.C. § 1915 confers on a district court only the power to "request" that counsel represent a litigant who is proceeding in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The Court has only the power to ask pro bono counsel to represent Plaintiff, not the power to “appoint” counsel. Plaintiff has presented his claims effectively, and the issues, at least at this stage, are not complex. The motion is DENIED. If circumstances change such that Plaintiff needs an attorney, the Court will sua sponte refer the case to the Federal Pro Bono Project to look for counsel to represent Plaintiff pro bono.

Plaintiff has filed a motion to order prison officials to increase his weekly time in the law library from two hours to six hours per week. Plaintiff does not presently have a deadline for filing, but he states that he would like to use the time to familiarize himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules. The Defendants are health care employees at Salinas Valley State Prison. The Court does not have jurisdiction to order non-parties --- such as the law deadline, he can renew his request to prison officials for additional hours in the law library, and/or || he may request an extension of time from the Court.

3 IT IS SO ORDERED.

4 Dated: March 23, 2021

6 ne

JAGQQUELINE SCOTT CORL 7 United States Magistrate Judge

Z 18