Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:08-CV-1766.
October 16, 2008
ORDER
AND NOW, this 16th day of October, 2008, upon consideration of plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 9), and it appearing from the complaint (Doc. 1), and the motion to appoint counsel, that plaintiff is capable of properly and forcefully prosecuting his claims with adequate factual investigation and appropriate citations to governing authority, and that resolution of the facial merit of plaintiff's claims neither implicates complex legal or factual issues nor requires factual investigation or the testimony of expert witnesses, see Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 155-57 (3d Cir. 1993) (listing factors relevant to request for counsel), it is hereby ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 9) is DENIED. If further proceedings demonstrate the need for counsel, the matter will be reconsidered either sua sponte or upon motion of plaintiff. See id.
Although plaintiff is required to comply with Special Management Unit procedures at his present place of incarceration (Doc. 9, at 3), I am confident that the access provided to the law library and other necessary resources is sufficient for purposes of pursuing this litigation.