Opinion
No. CIV S-06-0336 GEB GGH P.
August 8, 2007
ORDER
Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff's request for the appointment of counsel will therefore be denied.
On May 23, 2007, defendants Sahota and Sisto filed a motion to dismiss. On August 10, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion for a sixty day extension of time, although he does not identify what he needs the extension for. Because plaintiff did not file an opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss, the request for extension of time is presumably to file an opposition.
Although plaintiff's motion for extension of time is untimely, the court will grant plaintiff twenty days from the date of this order to file an opposition to defendants' motion. Failure to file an opposition will be deemed a waiver of opposition.
Accordingly, T IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's August 1, 2007 request for an extension of time is granted;
2. Plaintiff is granted twenty days from the date of this order in which to file an opposition to defendants' May 23, 2007, motion to dismiss;
3. Plaintiff's August 1, 2007 motion for the appointment of counsel is denied.