United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5014 September Term, 2024 1:24-cv-02695-UNA Filed On: June 4, 2025 Jose L. Canales Cancel, Appellant v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, General Attorney or ALL Member of the Board, Chair of the Board, Appellee ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Pillard, Katsas, and Rao, Circuit Judges JUDGMENT This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief and appendix filed by appellant. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). Upon consideration of the foregoing and the motion to appoint counsel, it is ORDERED that the motion to appoint counsel be denied. In civil cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. It is FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order entered January 8, 2025, be affirmed. The district court concluded that dismissal was required because appellant had not shown an applicable waiver of sovereign immunity and because his requested relief was unavailable under the Administrative Procedure Act.

On appeal, appellant does not challenge those conclusions, and he therefore has forfeited any such challenge. United States ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp., 380 F.3d 488, 497 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ____________ No. 25-5014 September Term, 2024 of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT: Clifton B. Cislak, Clerk BY: /s/ Daniel J. Reidy Deputy Clerk

Page 2