Reed v. Kang, et al.

Filing 22

ORDER STRIKING 20 Motion for Appointment of Counsel; ORDER DENIED AS MOOT 8 Motion for Extension of Time to Pay Filing Fee, signed by Magistrate Judge Gerald B. Cohn on 10/08/2010. (Martin, S)

(PC) Reed v. Kang, et al.

Doc. 22

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 (Doc. 8) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Carol Reed ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner who is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on July 26, 2010. (Doc. 1.) On August 18, 2010, an order granting the motion to proceed in forma pauperis was issued. (Doc. 6.) On August 17, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. 7.) On September 1, 2010, Plaintiff filed a document entitled motion to appoint counsel which was actually a motion for an extension of time to pay the filing fee. (Doc. 8.) On September 1, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion to appoint counsel. (Doc. 9.) All three motions were denied as motions to appoint counsel on September 9, 2010. (Doc. 12.) On September 15, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. 14.) The motion was denied on September 20, 2010. (Doc. 15.) On September 23, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. 16.) On September 27, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. 17.) On September 28, 2010, an order denying the appointment of 1
Dockets.Justia.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CAROL Y. REED, Plaintiff, v.

CASE NO. 1:10-CV-01337-GBC PC ORDER STRIKING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (Doc. 20)

HO KANG, et al., ORDER DISREGARDING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO PAY FILING FEE AS MOOT Defendants. /

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

counsel for the motion filed September 20 was issued. (Doc. 19.) On September 30, 2010, an order denying the appointment of counsel for the motion filed September 27, 2010 was issued. (Doc. 19.) On October 7, 2010, a motion for appointment of counsel was filed. (Doc. 20.) All motions for appointment of counsel have been duplicative. Plaintiff is advised that, at this stage of the litigation, she should not file any further duplicative motions for appointment of counsel and that any further duplicative motions will be stricken from the record. Accordingly it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. 2. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 612e7d October 8, 2010 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The motion filed October 7, 2010 is STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD; and The motion filed September 1, 2010, is DENIED as moot.

2