1. When should a total disabled incarcerated indigent prisoner thats
under the direct care and jurisdiction of the California department
of corrections and rehabilitation as a totally dependent of the the
state corrections be appointed legal assistant in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983
against the state CDCR and its EMPLOYEES/CONTRACTORS for the
deprivation depriving plaintiff of his constitutional rights?.

2, When should a totaldisabled incarcerated indigent inmate/patient be
appointed pro bono counsel in a 42 U.S.C. §;1983 that is totally dependent on the state CDCR?

3. When should/o tt cm r* sz inoo0tal dlsabled incarcerated inmate/patient in a 42 U.S.C .$ 1983 case be consider a complex case to handle if when
he. or she is fully dependent on the state or corrections for full representation?

4. Why are only prisoners properly filed legal proceedings in the
screening process in a 42. U.S.C. § 1983 being intentionally dis
criminatory illegally screened out by California district courts
and court of appeals Ninh Circuit judges when inmates submits
their properly filed actions naming CDCR and its Employees/
Contractors under the continuing violation doctrine that
properly joined together in their civil right complaints
pro se indigent state prisoner?

5. Why is it okay for legal professional attorney's to join defendants
in the same similar course.of conduct arriving from retaliations
together from different jurisdiction under the continuing violation
doctrine in claims against CDCR and its Employees/Contractors legal
control,but within the same similar actions prisoners acting in
pro se indigent prisoners is being denied the same legal protections
to prosecute their claims against state defendants?was
as a

6. Why are stateprisoners in CDCR custody being intentionally dis
criminated against to properly join defendants in their claims of
or tb^eat to safety in the same course of conduct of
CDCRand its Employees/Contractors when the California of correctios
is withm the same and under the state of California acting as ane public entity?

7. Why are state, prisoners being intentional denied to process their
cognisable claim s properly joined together under the continuing
violation doctrine laws,but professional lawyers are being allowed
to bringforth them same similar claims against a large valume of
defendants working as agents of CDCR and the STATE of California
in different jurisdictions of CDCR against CDCR and its Employees/
Contractors under the same continuing violation doctrine act?

8. Should a legal defense fund be set aside for indigent state prisoners
thatbare totally disabled and dependent on the state of California
for advocation and legal assistant when indigent and unable to .
afford legal aid or counsel to hire indivisual in these complex
cases of medical or mental ADA retaliation^complaints and the;use
of forse on disabled state- prisoners?

9, Who should. be : liabletfco' legally represent indigent dependent total
disabled state prisoners in their indivisual complex civil .complaints that are fully dependent on the state to advocate their inmate/
patients rights and scare?

10. Why are the american with, disabilities act being discriminatory
over looked by the district and appeals federal courts and magistrate
and district, judges when it comes to

When should a total disabled incarcerated indigent prisoner be appointed legal assistant in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case?