MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
SAM A. CROW, Senior District Judge.
This matter is a civil rights complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff, a prisoner, proceeds pro se. On May 4, 2017, U.S. Magistrate Judge Waxse denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis, finding plaintiff has three qualifying strikes and has not made the necessary showing to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)
Plaintiff has filed a response (Doc. #7) and a motion to appoint counsel (Doc. #8). In the response, plaintiff argues that he has had no prior disqualifying strikes. However, the Court has reviewed the cases cited by Judge Waxse and concludes that plaintiff was the complaining party in each case and that the terminations of those cases qualify as strikes under Section 1915(g).
Plaintiff also moves for the appointment of counsel. As a party to a civil action, plaintiff has no constitutional right to appointed counsel. See Durre v. Dempsey, 869 F.2d 543, 547 (10 th Cir. 1988)(per curiam). However, in its discretion, a federal court may appoint counsel to assist a party who is unable to afford counsel. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). A court deciding whether to appoint counsel should consider "the merits of the litigant's claims, the nature of the factual issues raised in the claims, the litigant's ability to present his claims, and the complexity of the legal issues raised by the claims." Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995)(internal quotations and citations omitted).
The Court has carefully reviewed the motion and declines to appoint counsel. Plaintiff's motion appears to add a number of unrelated arguments and references, and the Court finds no argument or issue that warrants the appointment of counsel.
IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel (Doc. #8) is denied. Plaintiff remains obligated to pay the full filing fee on or before June 4, 2017.