1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 - UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 || Dolores Kelly, Case No.: 23cv592-JO-DDL Plaintitt | ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 13 || V. PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS; 14 || Wedge Wood, DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM; 15 Defendant.| AND DENYING MOTION TO 16 APPOINT COUNSEL 17 On April 3, 2023, Plaintiff Dolores Kelly filed a complaint, a motion for leave t 18 || proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), and a motion to appoint counsel. For the reasons states 19 ||below, the Court grants the IFP motion, dismisses the complaint without prejudice fo 20 || failure to state a claim, and denies the motion to appoint counsel without prejudice. 21 I. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IFP 22 Upon review of Plaintiff’s affidavit in support of her IFP motion, the Court find 23 ||that Plaintiff has made a sufficient showing of inability to pay the filing fee required t 24 || prosecute this action. Accordingly, the Court grants the IFP motion [Dkt. 2]. 25 Il. FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 26 Although the Court allows Plaintiff to proceed IFP, the complaint must be □□□□□□□□□ 27 || for failure to state a claim. The Court is under a continuing duty to dismiss an IFP cas 28 || whenever the Court determines that the action “fails to state a claim upon which relief ca:

1 ||be granted.”

(e)(2)(B)(ii). While Plaintiff's complaint seems to focus on 2 || fraud regarding real property, the nature of the claims alleged is unclear. See Ashcroft v. 3 || Iqbal,

(2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,

, □□□□□□□ 4 ||570 (2007). The complaint also contains no allegations regarding the basis for the Court’s 5 ||subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g.,

, 1332. For these reasons, the 6 Court dismisses the complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim. 7 II. MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL 8 Plaintiff also filed a motion to appoint counsel. Dkt. "3.. There is no constitutional 9 ||right to counsel in civil cases, and the Court appoints counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 10 |} § 1915(e)(1) only in “exceptional circumstances.” Exceptional circumstances require a 11 || plaintiff to show a likelihood of success on the merits and an ability to articulate her claims 12 |\“in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Agyeman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 13 ||

, 1103 (9th Cir. 2004) (quoting Wilborn v. Escalderon,

, 1331 14 || (9th Cir. 1986)). Because the Court finds the nature of Plaintiffs claims unclear, it cannot 15 ||conclude that Plaintiff has established a likelihood of success on the merits at this stage. 16 ||For this reason, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel without prejudice 17 ||[Dkt.

IV. CONCLUSION 19 For the reasons stated above, the Court grants Plaintiffs IFP motion [Dkt. 2], denies 20 ||the motion to appoint counsel [Dkt. '3 ] without prejudice, and dismisses □□□□□□□□□□□ 21 ||complaint without prejudice. The Court grants Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint 22 sets forth the basis of the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction on or before May 31, 23 |}2023. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 || Dated: uf a 26 27 orablé Jinsook Ohta 38 United States District Judge