Ambrocio

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSE AMBROCIO, Case No.: 19-CV-1356-WQH(WVG)

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT

v. PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO APPOINT COUNSEL

K. COTTRELL,

Defendant. [Doc. No. 8.] 16 Plaintiff seeks appointment of counsel to prosecute this civil rights case. However, the Court concludes appointment of counsel is not appropriate at this time. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. “There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a § 1983 action.” Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520, 1525 (9th Cir. 1997) (partially overruled en banc on other grounds). Thus, federal courts do not have the authority “to make coercive appointments of counsel.” Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 490 U.S. 296, 310 (1989); see also United States v. $292,888.04 in U.S. Currency, 54 F.3d 564, 569 (9th Cir. 1995). Districts courts do have discretion, however, pursuant to U.S.C. …