Alexander

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT WILLIAM TUNSTALL, JR, No. 2:21-cv-1701 TLN AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER M. ALEXANDER, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, has filed a response to the order denying his application to proceed in forma pauperis in which he states that because his application has been denied, “[t]he court can provide Plaintiff with a[n] Attorney.” ECF No. 11. The response will be construed as a motion to appoint counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the district court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d…