Free Order - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00379-JJF Document 21 Filed 07/11/2008 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
WILLIAM BOYD, :
Plaintiff, ;
v. ; Civil Action No. 07-379-JJF
UNITED STATES GOLF E
ASSOCIATION, :
Defendant. E
QEE
WHEREAS, on May 28, 2008, the Court entered an Order
granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss this action and affording
Plaintiff leave to file an Amended Complaint within thirty days
of the date of the Order (D.I. 17);
WHEREAS, the Court’s May 28, 2008 Order stated “[i]f an
Amended Complaint is not filed within the time allowed, it will
be deemed Plaintiff stands on his Complaint and an Order will be
entered closing the case;"
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2008, Plaintiff filed a motion (D.I.
18) requesting appointment of counsel and additional time to
amend his complaint, stating that he proceeds in fgrma pauperis
and cannot afford counsel;
WHEREAS, indigent civil litigants possess neither a
constitutional nor a statutory right to appointed counsel.
Parham v. Johnson, 126 F.3d 454, 456-57 (3d Cir. 1997).
Nonetheless, district courts have statutory authority to appoint
counsel for indigent civil litigants at any time during the

Case 1:07-cv-00379-JJF Document 21 Filed 07/11/2008 Page 2 of 3
litigation. 28 U S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (providing that "[t]he court
may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford
counsel"); Montgomery v. Pinchak, 294 F.3d 492, 504 (3d Cir.
2002).
WHEREAS, Section 1915(e)(1) affords district courts broad
discretion in determining whether appointment of counsel in a
civil case is appropriate. Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 153 (3d
Cir. 1993). As a threshold matter, the Court must assess whether
the claimant's case has some arguable merit in fact and law. Id.
at 155.
WHEREAS, as stated by the Court in its May 28, 2008 Order,
Plaintiff in his Complaint merely makes blanket assertions of
entitlement to relief, and does not provide facts sufficient to
enable Defendant to respond to the allegations against it (D.I.
l7 8.1; 5) ;
WHEREAS, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s action lacks
arguable merit in fact and law, and that appointment of counsel
is thus inappropriate;
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel and
Request for Additional Time (D I. 18) is DENIED;
2. Pursuant to the Court’s Order granting Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss (D.I. 17) and the expiration of the
time allotted Plaintiff to filed an Amended Complaint,
Civil Action No. 07-379-JJF is CLOSED;

Case 1:07-cv-00379-JJF Document 21 Filed 07/11/2008 Page 3 of 3
3. Plaintiff’s Motion to Add Defendants (D.I. 19) is
DENIED as moot.
July It , 2008 CI4vw»~
UNI S T DISTRIC UDGE