Arvind Vyas Gopal v. Johnson, et al.
Arvind Vyas Gopal v. Johnson, et al.
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 ARVIND VYAS GOPAL, No. 2:25-cv-1372 DAD CKD P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 JOHNSON, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel under
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff 17 requests that the court appoint counsel. District courts lack authority to require counsel to 18 represent indigent prisoners in section 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court,
490 U.S. 19 296, 298(1989). In exceptional circumstances, the court may request an attorney to voluntarily 20 represent such a plaintiff. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Terrell v. Brewer,
935 F.2d 1015, 1017 21 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright,
900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36(9th Cir. 1990). When 22 determining whether “exceptional circumstances” exist, the court must consider plaintiff’s 23 likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro 24 se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Palmer v. Valdez,
560 F.3d 965, 970 25 (9th Cir. 2009) (district court did not abuse discretion in declining to appoint counsel). The 26 burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances is on the plaintiff.
Id.Circumstances 27 common to most prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not 28 establish exceptional circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 1 Having considered the factors under Palmer, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to 2 || meet his burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of 3 || counsel at this time. 4 Plaintiff has also requested an extension of time to file a first amended complaint. Good 5 || cause appearing, the request will be granted. 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. Plaintiffs motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 11) is DENIED without 8 || prejudice; 9 2. Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED; and 10 3. Plaintiffis granted forty-five days from the date of this order in which to file a first 11 || amended complaint. 12 | Dated: November 24, 2025 / ae / a Ly a
14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 8 gopal372.36+31.new 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown