Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
State prisoner brought § 1983 action against defendant official, alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Jeremy Fogel, J., dismissed. Prisoner appealed. The Court of Appeals held that official's actions were at most negligent, and did not rise to level of deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
Affirmed.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Jeremy Fogel, District Judge, Presiding.
Before KOZINSKI, T.G. NELSON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Frank Eugene Wingfield, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo dismissals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). See Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.
Because Wingfield alleged that Hite's actions were at the most negligent and did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference to a serious medical need, the district court did not err by dismissing Wingfield's
Page 921.
complaint. See Frost v. Agnos, 152 F.3d 1124, 1130 (9th Cir.1998).
AFFIRMED.