Penn
Penn v. Allen
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 MARLIN A. PENN, Case No. 23-cv-00126-JSC
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF
v. TIME; DENYING APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL
T. ALLEN, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 21, 24 Defendants.
This is a civil rights case filed by a California prisoner proceeding pro se. Good cause appearing, Defendants’ motion for an extension of time to file a dispositive motion is GRANTED. (ECF No. 24.) The motion is due on or before July 17, 2023, the opposition is due on or before August 24, 2023, and if an opposition is filed, then Defendants shall file a reply brief within 14 days of the date the opposition is filed.1 Plaintiff has filed a motion for appointment of a lawyer to represent him. (ECF No. 21.) There is no right to counsel in a civil case such as this. See Lassiter v. Dep't of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981). The decision to request counsel to represent an indigent litigant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is within “the sound…