1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAYMOND ANGLIN, 1:19-cv-01334 SAB (PC)

12 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

13 v. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

14 M. PRATTI, et al., [ECF No. 3]

15 Defendant.

16 17 On 09/24/2019, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff does 18 not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 19 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant 20 to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of 21 Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the court may 22 request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 23 1525. 24 Without a reasonable method of securing and compensating counsel, the Court will seek 25 volunteer counsel only in the most serious and exceptional cases. In determining whether 26 Aexceptional circumstances exist, the district court must evaluate both the likelihood of success 27 of the merits [and] the ability of the [plaintiff] to articulate his claims pro se in light of the 28 complexity of the legal issues involved.@ Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 1 In the present case, the Court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Even 2 | if itis assumed that Plaintiff is not well versed in the law and that he has made serious allegations 3 | which, if proved, would entitle him to relief, his case is not exceptional. This Court is faced with 4 | similar cases almost daily. Further, at this early stage in the proceedings, the Court cannot make 5 | a determination that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, and based on a review of the 6 | record in this case, the Court does not find that Plaintiff cannot adequately articulate his claims. 7 | Id. g For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel is HEREBY g | DENIED, without prejudice. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAM Le 12 | Dated: _September 26, 2019 _ OO

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 >