Brian Jordan appeals after the district court 1 entered judgment on an adverse jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. On appeal, Jordan challenges only the magistrate judge’s 2 denials of his motions for appointment of counsel, and the district court’s entry of judgment as a matter of law for one of the defendants during the trial. After careful review, we first conclude that the magistrate judge did not abuse his discretion in denying Jordan’s motions for appointment of counsel. See Phillips v. Jasper Cnty. Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794-795 (8th Cir. 2006) (abuse-of-discretion standard of review; setting forth relevant criteria for appointment of counsel). We further conclude that the district court did not err in granting judgment as a matter of law to one of the defendants. See Sisk v. Picture People, Inc., 669 F.3d 896, 899 (8th Cir. 2012) (de novo standard of review); Hopson v. Fredericksen, 961 F.2d 1374, 1378-79 (8th Cir. 1992) (upholding directed verdict for police officer on § 1983 claim where officer allegedly threatened physical injury if arrestee remained silent, but did not brandish weapon, physically assault arrestee, or make any type of physical gesture toward him). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.