Bacon v. Barker et al

Filing 38

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 37 Motion to Compel; denying 37 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead on 11/21/22 (alt)

Case 2:21-cv-00760-HCN-DBP Document 38 Filed 11/21/22 PageID.139 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Michael A. Bacon,
Plaintiff,

v.
Jacob Barker, et al.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL
AND MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL
Case No. 2:21-cv-760 HCN DBP

Defendants.

Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr.
Chief Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, once again asks the court to appoint counsel. (ECF
No. 37.) Plaintiff also requests a court order concerning access to the mail. The court denies the
motion.
Plaintiff has already requested the appointment of counsel twice. Each time the court
denied the request noting Plaintiff’s failure to meet the burden to “convince the court that there is
sufficient merit to his claim to warrant the appointment of counsel.” Hill v. SmithKline Beecham
Corp., 393 F.3d 1111, 1115 (10th Cir. 2004). Once again Plaintiff has failed to meet this burden
and thus his request for counsel is DENIED.
Plaintiff’s motion notes four other cases he has filed in this court requesting he be
allowed access to the mail and presumably any filings in those cases. Plaintiff has now updated
his address after being transferred to another facility. The court temporarily stayed proceedings
in this case to allow Plaintiff time to arrive at a new facility and provide a change of address. The
court finds no support for Plaintiff’s argument that he is not receiving mail. Perhaps, mail that
was sent to his old address is slow in being forwarded. Yet, because Plaintiff’s address is now
current there is nothing before the court warranting an order compelling the facility to allow
Plaintiff to receive mail. Thus, this part of Plaintiff’s motion is also DENIED.

Case 2:21-cv-00760-HCN-DBP Document 38 Filed 11/21/22 PageID.140 Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s third motion for counsel and motion to compel is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 21 November 2022.

Dustin B. Pead
United States Magistrate Judge

2