Opinion
20-16876
12-22-2021
DAVID GONZALEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PHUC LAM, Dr., Defendant-Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court No. 4:18-cv-07508-YGR for the Northern District of California Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, District Judge, Presiding
Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
California state prisoner David Gonzalez appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment 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 de novo. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Gonzalez failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Lam was deliberately indifferent to Gonzalez's complaints of eye pain and other eye-related issues. See id. at 1060-61 (a prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he or she knows of and disregards a risk to the prisoner's health; medical malpractice, negligence or difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.