Marquez-Ortiz v. United States

Background

Jerylan Marquez-Ortiz was representing himself. The Government had filed a motion to dismiss, and his original deadline to respond was January 4, 2021. He asked for an extension based on circumstances described in a December 28, 2020 letter.

He also asked the court to seek pro bono counsel, meaning a volunteer lawyer, on his behalf.

Court’s Analysis

The court said it has broad discretion over requests for volunteer counsel. Under the factors discussed in the cited Second Circuit decisions, the court must first consider whether the plaintiff’s claim appears likely to have substance and whether the plaintiff is unable to afford counsel.

The court concluded that it could not yet evaluate whether Marquez-Ortiz’s claims were likely to have substance. It noted that the Government’s motion challenged the timing of the complaint rather than the content of the claims, and that the case was still in its infancy. The court also perceived little to no risk that Marquez-Ortiz would be unable to describe his efforts to file the complaint without a lawyer.

Ruling

The court granted Marquez-Ortiz’s request for an extension of time and set February 26, 2021, as the deadline to respond to the motion to dismiss. Judge J. Paul Oetken denied without prejudice Marquez-Ortiz’s application for the court to seek pro bono counsel. The court stated that he may resubmit the application when it is better able to evaluate the substance of his claims.