Benyamini v. Manjuano et al

Filing 140

ORDER Denying 137 Motion for Reconsideration and Motion for Appointment of Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 10/17/2011. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ROBERT P. BENYAMINI, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) v. ) ) MANJUANO, et al., ) ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) 1:06-cv-01096-AWI-GSA-PC ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (Docs. 130, 137.) 17 18 On October 3, 2011, Plaintiff filed objections to the Court's order denying him appointment of 19 counsel. (Doc. 130.) The Court treats Plaintiff's objections as a motion for reconsideration. On October 20 13, 2011, Plaintiff again requested appointment of counsel. (Doc. 137.) 21 I. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 22 Rule 60(b)(6) allows the Court to relieve a party from an order for any reason that justifies relief. 23 Rule 60(b)(6) “is to be used sparingly as an equitable remedy to prevent manifest injustice and is to be 24 utilized only where extraordinary circumstances . . .” exist. Harvest v. Castro, 531 F.3d 737, 749 (9th 25 Cir. 2008) (internal quotations marks and citation omitted). The moving party “must demonstrate both 26 injury and circumstances beyond his control . . . .” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 27 In seeking reconsideration of an order, Local Rule 230(k) requires Plaintiff to show “what new or 28 1 1 different facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such 2 prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion.” 3 “A motion for reconsideration should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless 4 the district court is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an 5 intervening change in the controlling law,” Marlyn Nutraceuticals, Inc. v. Mucos Pharma GmbH & Co., 6 571 F.3d 873, 880 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal quotations marks and citations omitted, and “[a] party 7 seeking reconsideration must show more than a disagreement with the Court’s decision, and 8 recapitulation . . . ” of that which was already considered by the Court in rendering its decision,” U.S. 9 v. Westlands Water Dist., 134 F.Supp.2d 1111, 1131 (E.D. Cal. 2001). 10 Plaintiff argues that he meets the special circumstances required for counsel to be appointed. He 11 suffers from severe claustrophobia and is forced to take psychotropic medication that incapacitates him. 12 He is limited in his knowledge of the law and has sought counsel multiple times, without success. He 13 argues that his rights to due process are violated if he cannot proceed with counsel. Plaintiff contends 14 that he is proceeding at a "key part of his litigation," defending his case against defendant's motion for 15 summary judgment. (Doc. 130 ¶3.) He asserts that defendants' litigation tactics are "baffling" to him. 16 (Id. ¶4.) He lacks adequate access to the law library, which is the only place he can read and plan his 17 litigation, due to his claustrophobia. He suffers from retaliation, is often in Ad-Seg without any access 18 to the law library, and lacks adequate access to his property, making it difficult to meet court deadlines. 19 Plaintiff also asserts that he is limited in his ability to conduct discovery. 20 Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the Court committed clear error, or presented the Court with 21 new information of a strongly convincing nature, to induce the Court to reverse its prior decision. 22 Therefore, the motion for reconsideration shall be denied. 23 II. MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 24 Plaintiff entire motion consists of this request: "I also ask the courts for counsel." (Doc. 137 at 25 2:13-14.) As such, Plaintiff offers no argument for the Court's consideration. Therefore, the motion 26 must be denied. 27 /// 28 2 1 III. CONCLUSION 2 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 3 1. Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is DENIED; and 4 2. Plaintiff's motion for counsel is DENIED. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: 6i0kij October 17, 2011 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?