Bosenko

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHRISTOPHER DALE STAFFIN, No. 2:19-CV-1058-KJM-DMC Plaintiff, v. ORDER TOM BOSENKO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion, ECF No. 10, for the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent plaintiffs in civil actions. See e.g. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the Court does not at this time find the required exceptional circumstances. In his motion, Plaintiff states that he can “prove ongoing harassment and…