1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FORREST KENDRID, No. 2:23-cv-1145 TLN CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 YAHIYA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 I. INTRODUCTION 18 Plaintiff is a former detainee proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis with this 19 civil rights action. Pending before the Court is plaintiff’s second motion for an extension of time 20 to file an opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion and renewed motion for 21 appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 50.) For the following reasons, plaintiff’s motion for an 22 extension of time is granted and plaintiff’s renewed motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 23 II. DISCUSSION 24 On or around June 19, 2024, plaintiff was released from the California Medical Facility 25 (“CMF”). (ECF No. 39 at 1-2.) Defendants filed a summary judgment motion on September 17, 26 2025. (ECF No. 45.) On October 2, 2025, plaintiff filed his first motion for an extension of time 27 to file an opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion and motion for appointment of 28 counsel. (ECF No. 48.) On October 8, 2025, this Court denied plaintiff’s motion for appointment 1 of counsel and granted plaintiff an extension to November 10, 2025 to file his opposition. (ECF 2 No. 49.) On November 10, 2025, plaintiff filed the pending second motion for extension of time 3 to file an opposition and renewed motion for appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 50.) 4 A. Motion for Appointment of Counsel 5 It is “well-established” that there is generally no constitutional right to counsel in civil 6 cases.” United States v. Sardone,

(9th Cir. 1996). Under “exceptional 7 circumstances,” a court may appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants pursuant to 28

(e)(1). When determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, a court 9 considers both “the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to 10 articulate [the] claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Palmer v. 11 Valdez,

(9th Cir. 2009). 12 In the pending motion, plaintiff claims that he has been hospitalized twice for cardiac 13 problems and for MRSA1, apparently following his release from CMF. (ECF No. 50 at 1.) 14 Plaintiff was discharged from the hospital on October 25, 2025. (Id.) Attached to plaintiff’s 15 motion is a form titled Adult Discharge Instructions dated October 25, 2025 for plaintiff from 16 PIH Health. (Id. at 4-6.) In the section titled “Special Instructions,” the form states, 17 You were evaluated for abdominal pain 2/2 chronic constipation 2/2 chronic opioid use and diagnosed with MRSA (methicillin-resistant 18 staphylococcus) in the nares. Please take laxatives as recommended to prevent constipation. Continue to follow up with Primary Care 19 Doctor and cardiology for management of chronic conditions. 20 (Id. at 3.) 21 In the pending motion, plaintiff claims that he is fighting mental illness and has physical 22 disabilities. (Id.) Plaintiff claims that he is paralyzed on the left side of his body, uses a 23 wheelchair and is bed bound. (Id.) Plaintiff claims that he does not have a permanent roof over 24 his head as he did while incarcerated. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff claims that he does not have access to 25 legal assistance, a law library or “ADA” workers, as he did when he was incarcerated. (Id.) For 26 1 MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) is a type of bacteria that many antibiotics 27 do not work on. MRSA most often causes skin infections, but it can also cause serious illnesses that are hard to treat. See https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/11633-methicillin- 28 resistant-staphylococcus-aureus-mrsa. 1 | these reasons, plaintiff requests that the Court appoint counsel to represent him. (Id.) 2 Though the Court is sympathetic to plaintiffs situation, as this Court found in the October 3 || 8, 2025 order, the issues raised in this action are not particularly complex. Plaintiff's claims 4 || concern the care he received from defendants Yahitya and Tucci while plaintiff was housed in a 5 || Mental Health Crisis Bed (“MHCB”) at CMF from approximately February 16, 2023 to February 6 || 23, 2023. Plaintiff alleges that he received inadequate mental health treatment and that 7 || defendants retaliated against him for his legal activities. In addition, as stated in the October 8, 8 | 2025 order, plaintiff was able to file various documents throughout this litigation in spite of his 9 | mental illness and disabilities, and continues to do so. As also found in the October 8, 2025 10 || order, the Court also cannot determine whether plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits. In 11 | making this finding, this Court reviewed plaintiffs complaint (ECF No. 1) and defendants’ 12 || summary judgment motion (ECF No. 45). 13 For the reasons discussed above, and because the Court has extremely limited resources to 14 | appoint attorneys in civil cases, plaintiff's renewed motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 15 B. Motion for Extension of Time 16 Good cause appearing, plaintiff is granted an extension of thirty days from the date of this 17 || order to file his opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion. No further requests for 18 || extensions of time will be granted. 19 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 20 1. Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 50) is granted; plaintiff's 21 || opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion is due within thirty days of the date of this 22 || order; no further requests for extensions of time will be granted; and 23 2. Plaintiff's renewed motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 50) is denied. 24 25 || Dated: November 18, 2025 A aA Aan Spe | CHI SOO KIM 27 | Kend1145.31(2y2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28