Rosario

(PC) Manafov v. Rosario

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 9, 20212:19-cv-00337California466 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VUSAL MANAFOV, Case No. 2:20-cv-00337-MCE-JDP (PC)

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME AND TO

v. APPOINT COUNSEL

D. ROSARIO, ECF No.

Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has filed a motion that requests an extension of time and appointment of counsel. ECF No. 28. As for the requested extension of time, plaintiff’s motion does not identify the specific deadline he seeks to extend. Accordingly, the motion for an extension of time will be denied without prejudice. Plaintiff’s motion also fails to demonstrate that appointment of counsel is warranted at this time. Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, see Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the court lacks the authority to require an attorney…

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.