Perez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RICHARD GARCIA, Case No.: 1:17-cv-00865-LJO-JLT (PC)

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND

v. DISREGARDING MOTION TO PROCEED

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

PEREZ, et al., (Docs. 53, 54) Defendants.

16 On December 23, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). (Doc. 54.) The Court, though, already granted Plaintiff’s prior motion to proceed IFP, (Doc. 2), in August 2017. (Doc. 8.) Thus, the Court DISREGARDS Plaintiff’s motion, (Doc. 54), as moot. Plaintiff also requests the appointment of counsel. (Doc. 53.) Plaintiffs do not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in section 1983 actions, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require an attorney to represent plaintiffs under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). See Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 304-05 (1989). However, in “exceptional circumstances,” the Court may request the voluntary…