Bo
Bo v. Board of Regents of the University of California
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Huyun BO, Case No.: 24-cv-2212-AGS-KSC
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
v. MOTIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL (ECF 2) AND TO
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
EXPEDITE TRIAL SCHEDULE
CALIFORNIA, et al., (ECF 9) Defendants.
9 Plaintiff Huyun Bo asks the Court to appoint counsel on his behalf under 42 U.S.C. 10 § 2000e-5 and to expedite the trial schedule. (See ECF 2; ECF 9.) But he does not qualify 11 for counsel appointment and has made no showing that an expedited schedule is warranted. 12 “[I]n such circumstances as the court may deem just, the court may appoint an 13 attorney.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1). When determining whether to appoint counsel under 14 this “employment discrimination case” provision, courts consider three factors: “(1) the 15 plaintiff’s financial resources; (2) the efforts made by the plaintiff to secure counsel on his 16 or her own; and (3) the merit of the plaintiff’s claim.” Johnson v. United States Dep’t of…