Perdomo
Perdomo v. Plumber
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CARLOS PERDOMO, Case No. 17-06962 BLF (PR) 11 Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING SECOND
MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF v.
COUNSEL
13 S.V.S.P., et al., 14 Defendants. (Docket No. 38)
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against prison officials at the Salinas Valley State Prison (“SVSP”). Plaintiff has filed a second motion and declaration requesting appointment of counsel. (Docket No. 38) Plaintiff declares he lacks income to employ counsel, he has limited access to the law library, and he has no education in the law. (Id.) Plaintiff does not provide the Court with any new information that he did not present in his first motion for appointment of counsel, (Docket No. 24), and his reasons are no different from those posed by other pro se prisoner litigants. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED without prejudice for lack of exceptional circumstances. See…