Opinion
Civil Action 3:20-CV-3658-S-BN
06-17-2021
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case [ECF No, 6] and then supplemented those findings, conclusions, and a recommendation [ECF No, 9], No. objections were filed. The District Court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation as supplemented for plain error. Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge as supplemented.
The Court also DENIES Plaintiffs February 4, 2021 Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint [ECF No. 10], which is virtually identical to Plaintiffs January 20, 2021 Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint [ECF No. 8], for the reasons expressed the Supplemental Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. These reasons further reflect that Plaintiff has not shown that exceptional circumstances require the appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The Court therefore DENIES Plaintiffs February 25, 2021 Motion for the Appointment of Counsel [ECF No. 11].
SO ORDERED.