Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

1
3:26-cv-00840-RBM-SBC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MOHAMMAD ZARE,
Petitioner,
v.
CHRISTOPHER LAROSE,,
Respondents.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-00840-RBM-SBC
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
APPOINT COUNSEL
On February 9, 2026, Petitioner Mohammad Zare (“Petitioner”), proceeding pro se,
filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Petition”). (Doc. 1.)
Petitioner also requests that the Court “appoint ‘FDSI’ to fight for [his] habeas and submit
a petition for ‘TRO.’” (Id. at 8.) The Court construes this request as a Motion to Appoint
Counsel. Because there is insufficient information for the Court to resolve it, the Motion
to Appoint Counsel is DENIED without prejudice. The Court will grant Petitioner leave
to file another motion to appoint counsel.
“Whenever the United States magistrate judge or the [C]ourt determines that the
interests of justice so require, representation may be provided for any financially eligible
person who . . . (B) is seeking relief under section 2241, 2254, or 2255 of title 28.”
Case 3:26-cv-00840-RBM-SBC Document 2 Filed 02/13/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
3:26-cv-00840-RBM-SBC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2). A “financially eligible person” is one who is “financially unable
to obtain adequate representation in accordance with this section.” 	Id. § 3006A(a). 	“In
deciding whether to appoint counsel in a habeas proceeding, the district court must evaluate
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.” 	Weygandt v.
Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983) (citations omitted).
Here, Petitioner includes no information regarding whether he is financially unable
to obtain adequate representation. Nor does he represent that he is unable to articulate his
claims without counsel. Accordingly, the Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED without
prejudice. 	On or before March 13, 2026, Petitioner MUST either: (1) file a renewed
Motion to Appoint Counsel addressing the deficiencies identified above; or (2) indicate
that he wishes to proceed without counsel.
In light of the likelihood that potentially appointed counsel may file an amended
Petition, the Court will not order a response to the Petition at this point. 	The Court will
issue a further order after it receives Petitioner’s filing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: February 13, 2026
___________________________________
HON. RUTH BERMUDEZ MONTENEGRO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:26-cv-00840-RBM-SBC Document 2 Filed 02/13/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2