FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 27 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MICHAEL D. WOODFALL, No. 13-15147
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00163-SRB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF
AMERICA; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 18, 2014**
Before: ALARCÓN, O’SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Michael D. Woodfall, a former Hawaii 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 serious medical needs while housed in Arizona. We
*
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).
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 Woodfall
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were
deliberately indifferent in treating his lower back injury. See id. at 1057-58 (a
prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he or she knows of and
disregards an excessive risk to the prisoner’s health; neither a prisoner’s difference
of opinion concerning the course of treatment nor mere negligence in diagnosing
or treating a medical condition amounts 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)
(per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
2 13-15147