Rushdan v. Perbula et al

Filing 44

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 02/17/09 denying 41 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Plummer, M)

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 vs. T. PERBULA, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied. On January 28, 2009, the court ordered plaintiff to complete service of process within sixty days. On February 6, 2009, plaintiff filed a letter with the court requesting information regarding the procedures for service of process. As stated in the January 28, 2009, 1 ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SALADIN RUSHDAN, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0729 GEB GGH P

1 2 3 4 5 6

order, plaintiff is to complete service of process in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, which sets forth the procedures for service of process. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel (no. 41) is denied. DATED: February 17, 2009 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2
GGH:md rush0729.31

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE