Opinion
23-10768
08-28-2024
LEONARD DORANCE OSTRANDER, Plaintiff, v. ADAM GILLEY, et al., Defendants.
Honorable Matthew F. Leitman
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S THIRD AND FOURTH MOTIONS TO APPOINT COUNSEL AND HIS REQUESTS FOR EXPEDITED HEARING OF THE MOTIONS [ECF NOS. 42, 43, 47, 48]
ELIZABETH A. STAFFORD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Leonard Dorance Ostrander moves a third and fourth time for appointment of counsel.ECF No. 42; ECF No. 47. He also moves for expedited hearing of his motions. ECF No. 43; ECF No. 48. The Court denied his earlier motions for appointment of counsel without prejudice, reasoning that Ostrander has not shown exceptional circumstances meriting appointment of counsel during this pretrial stage. ECF No. 10; ECF No. 26. This conclusion has not changed. Thus, Ostrander's third and fourth motions to appoint counsel (ECF Nos. 42 & 47) and his requests for expedited hearing of the motions (ECF Nos. 43 & 48) are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
The Honorable Matthew F. Leitman referred the case to the undersigned for all pretrial matters under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). ECF No. 8.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
NOTICE TO PARTIES ABOUT OBJECTIONS
Within 14 days of being served with this order, any party may file objections with the assigned district judge. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a). The district judge may sustain an objection only if the order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636. “When an objection is filed to a magistrate judge's ruling on a non-dispositive motion, the ruling remains in full force and effect unless and until it is stayed by the magistrate judge or a district judge.” E.D. Mich. LR 72.2.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that this document was served on counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court's ECF System to their email or First Class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on August 28, 2024.