MEMORANDUM **

Steven Vlasich, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment following a jury trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s evidentiary rulings. Nationwide Transp. Fin. v. Cass Info. Sys., Inc., 523 F.3d 1051, 1057-58 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding testimony from Shus-ter and Rodriguez because it was irrelevant and cumulative. See Fed.R.Evid. 401-02, 701-02; Lutz v. Glendale Union High Sch., 403 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir. 2005) (“[T]he district court has broad authority to limit the number of witnesses on a particular point to avoid cumulative evidence.”).

Vlasich’s remaining contentions, including those concerning Hoffman’s testimony *649 about his military service, are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.