Mitchell v. Snowden et al

Filing 37

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/29/16 ordering plaintiffs motion filed September 27,2016, which requests both extended time and appointment of counsel, 34 , is denied.(Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL J. MITCHELL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

No. 2:15-cv-1167 TLN AC P

ORDER

SNOWDEN, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff has filed a third motion for an indeterminate extension of time to file objections

18

to the court’s findings and recommendations filed June 10, 2016. See ECF No. 34. In response

19

to plaintiff’s initial similar request, the court construed plaintiff’s motion “as an objection to the

20

recommendation that this action be dismissed with prejudice, and to any and all findings and fact

21

and conclusions of law on which that recommendation is based,” thereby requiring the district

22

judge to review de novo plaintiff’s previously made arguments on the merits of his claims. See

23

ECF No. 31. Plaintiff’s instant request for extended time is therefore unnecessary and will be

24

denied.

25

Plaintiff also requests appointment of counsel. Based on the court’s findings that this

26

action is barred by the statute of limitations, the court construes no likelihood of success on the

27

merits of plaintiff’s claims and therefore finds that plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite

28

“exceptional circumstances” that may support appointment of counsel. See Palmer v. Valdez,

1

560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009). Therefore, plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel will

2

also be denied.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion filed September 27,

4

2016, which requests both extended time and appointment of counsel, ECF No. 34, is denied.

5

DATED: September 29, 2016

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