Sandoval

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ALBERTO SANDOVAL, Case No.: 19cv1584-JO(RBB)

CDCR # AM-0186,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

Plaintiff, APPOINT COUNSEL [ECF NO. 49] v.

DAVID GULDSETH, M.D., ROMAN

M. CHAM, M.D.,

16 Defendants.

18 Plaintiff Alberto Sandoval is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 19 forma pauperis, alleging civil rights violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against 20 Defendants David Guldseth, M.D., and Roman M. Cham, M.D. On February 11, 2022, 21 the Court received a letter from Plaintiff in which he requests the appointment of counsel 22 [ECF No. 49]. Plaintiff requests that counsel be appointed because he does not know 23 how to contest Defendant Guldseth’s motion for summary judgment and does not 24 understand the documents he has received from the court. (Pl.’s Mot. 1, ECF No. 49.) 25 As explained below, his motion is DENIED. 26 “[T]here is no absolute right to counsel in civil proceedings.” Hedges v. 27 Resolution Trust Corp., 32 F.3d 1360, 1363 (9th Cir. 1994) (citation omitted).…