FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERT WILLIAM WALTERS, No. 10-15890
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:07-cv-04921-TEH
v.
MEMORANDUM *
M. EVANS, Warden; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Thelton E. Henderson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 12, 2011 **
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Robert William Walters, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
deliberate indifference to his medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Jett v. Penner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
2006). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Walters
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants’
treatment of his shoulder and back injuries constituted deliberate indifference to his
medical needs. See Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 298 (1991) (inmate must
establish that prison officials “possessed a sufficiently culpable state of mind” to
implicate the Eighth Amendment); Jett, 439 F.3d at 1096 (deliberate indifference
requires “a purposeful act or failure to respond to pain or possible medical need”).
Walters’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 10-15890