Brown v. Hagel et al

Filing 12

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/2/2016 DENYING 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KEITH BROWN,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:15-cv-26-JAM-EFB PS

v.

ORDER

CHUCK HAGEL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
On April 22, 2016, plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel.1 ECF No. 8. 28

17
18

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) authorizes the appointment of counsel to represent an indigent civil litigant in

19

certain exceptional circumstances. See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.1991);

20

Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335–36 (9th Cir.1990); Richards v. Harper, 864 F.2d 85,

21

87 (9th Cir.1988). In considering whether exceptional circumstances exist, the court must

22

evaluate (1) the plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits; and (2) the ability of the plaintiff to

23

articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved. Terrell, 935

24

F.2d at 1017.

25

/////

26

/////

27
28

1

This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the
undersigned under Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
1

1

The court cannot conclude that plaintiff’s likelihood of success, the complexity of the

2

issues, or the degree of plaintiff’s ability to articulate his claims amount to exceptional

3

circumstances justifying the appointment of counsel at this time.

4

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel

5

(ECF No. 8) is denied without prejudice.

6

DATED: June 2, 2016.

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