Jaime Estrada v. C. Clines

559 F. App'x 637

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Jaime Ignacio Estrada appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his back pain and related medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Estrada did not raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant’s decisions regarding Estrada’s treatment for his back pain were “medically unacceptable under the circumstances, and [were] chosen in conscious disregard of an excessive risk to [Estrada’s] health.” Id. at 1058 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) (a difference in medical opinion does not rise to the level of deliberate indifference). Estrada also failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant was deliberately indifferent to his need for a particular bunk placement. See id. at 1060 (deliberate indifference is a high legal standard; mere negligence does not suffice).

Estrada’s requests for judicial notice, filed on April 8, 2013, and January 15, 2014, are denied.

AFFIRMED.

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.