(PC) Gates v. Rodriguez, 1:19-cv-01279

Plaintiff Johnny Howard Gates is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Case had a pre-settlement telephone conference and a settlement conference scheduled in April–May 2020.
On March 12, 2020 Gates moved for appointment of counsel, stating only that he needs an attorney to assist at upcoming court dates.
The court reviewed the motion under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) and the Ninth Circuit’s Rand exceptional-circumstances framework.
The court found no showing of likelihood of success on the merits and concluded the legal issues are not unusually complex and that Gates can articulate his claims.
The motion to appoint counsel was denied without prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Right to appointed counsel in civil §1983 suits	Requests appointed counsel for upcoming court dates	Not asserted in the record	No constitutional right to appointed counsel in this civil action; appointment not required
Authority under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(1) to obtain counsel	Asks court to appoint or obtain counsel	Not addressed	Court may request volunteer counsel only; cannot compel representation
Standard for appointment: "exceptional circumstances" (likelihood of success; ability to articulate)	Lacks legal training; needs help at hearings	Not addressed	Court must consider likelihood of success and plaintiff’s ability to articulate claims; both factors not met here
Disposition of motion to appoint counsel	Seeks appointment for assistance at conferences/hearings	Not addressed	Motion denied without prejudice

Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520 (9th Cir. 1997) (establishes "exceptional circumstances" test for requesting volunteer counsel under §1915(e)(1))
Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for the S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296 (1989) (§1915(e)(1) does not authorize courts to compel representation)