Opinion
3:22-cv-00465-MMD-CSD
01-13-2023
DANIEL RIGGS, Plaintiff v. STEVE SISOLAK, et al., Defendants
ORDER
On January 3, 2023, the Court issued a screening order and granted Plaintiff until February 3, 2023, to file an amended complaint or the case would proceed only on the Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim. (ECF No. 3 at 14-15). The Court also denied without prejudice Plaintiff's motion for appointment of a guardian ad litem and/or counsel. (Id. at 13). Plaintiff has now filed a second motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 6) and a motion for a thirty-day extension of time to file his amended complaint. (ECF No. 7). In support of his extension motion, Plaintiff states that he needs “additional time to research and draft the amended complaint.” (ECF No. 7).
The Court denies Plaintiff's second motion for appointment of counsel without prejudice. A litigant does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in § 1983 actions. Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), “[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” However, the court will appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants only in “exceptional circumstances.” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (§ 1983 action). “When determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances' exist, a court must consider the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. “Neither of these considerations is dispositive and instead must be viewed together.” Id. As the Court explained in its screening order, Plaintiff has failed to identify exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel at this time. (ECF No. 3 at 13).
The Court grants Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time. Plaintiff will file the amended complaint on or before March 6, 2023. If Plaintiff chooses not to file an amended complaint, this action will proceed only on the Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim. (ECF No. 3 at 14-15).
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's second motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 6) is denied without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file his amended complaint (ECF No. 7) is granted . Plaintiff will file his amended complaint on or before March 6, 2023.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Plaintiff fails to timely file his amended complaint, this action will proceed only on the Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim.