Jones

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GARY WAYNE ERVIN, No. 2:19-cv-01883-KJM-CKD (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER SCOTT ROBERT JONES et al., (ECF Nos. 11, 12) Defendants. 16 Presently before the court are pro se plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel and motion to clarify a previous order. (ECF Nos. 11, 12.) For the reasons stated below, the court DENIES plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel and instructs plaintiff that this matter is not stayed at this time. I. Legal Standard Any successful application for appointment of counsel must comply with criteria set forth in Bradshaw v. Zoological Society of San Diego, 662 F.2d 1301 (9th Cir. 1981). Before appointing counsel to a plaintiff, the court must consider (1) plaintiff’s financial resources, (2) the efforts already made by plaintiff to secure counsel, and (3) plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits. Id. at 1318. “The plaintiff has the burden of proof and must meet all three factors.” 27 …