Ramos

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GENE RAYMOND MATTHEWS, III No. 1:22-cv-01508-JLT-SAB (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S SECOND

MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF

v. COUNSEL, WITHOUT PREJUDICE S.RAMOSS, et al. (ECF No. 32) Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s second motion for appointment of counsel, filed August 23, 2023. There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in this action, Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Court cannot require any attorney to represent plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Mallard v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). However, in certain exceptional circumstances the Court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to section 1915(e)(1). Rand, 113 F.3d at 1525. …