Romero

(PC) Ayobi v. Romero

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 27, 20201:19-cv-00964California723 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 SHAJIA AYOBI, ) Case No. 1:19-cv-00964-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ) SECOND MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT 13 v. ) OF COUNSEL, AND GRANTING ) REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 14 ROMERO, ) 15 Defendant. ) (ECF Nos. 28, 29) ) 16 )

17 Plaintiff Shajia Ayobi is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel and request for an 20 extension of time to file a dispositive motion, filed October 26, 2020. (ECF Nos. 24, 25.) 21 Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. 22 Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require any attorney to represent 23 plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern 24 District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.