(PC) Taylor v. Lynch

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CODY RICHARD TAYLOR, No. 2:21-cv-2413 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER JEFF LYNCH, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff renews his request that the court appoint counsel, and also seeks the appointment of a paralegal. Both motions are denied. Plaintiff’s motion seeking appointment of a paralegal is denied because “ ‘the expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an indigent litigant] is proper only when authorized by Congress,’ ” Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976)), and the in forma pauperis statute does not authorize the expenditure of public funds for a paralegal, 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff’s first motion for appointment of counsel was denied on February 4, 2022. At the time plaintiff filed his second…