Nathaniel Morris v. Steven MacArthur

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 29 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NATHANIEL MORRIS, No. 09-15425 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:06-cv-00718-BES- VPC v. STEVEN MACARTHUR, MEMORANDUM * Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Brian E. Sandoval, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 16, 2010 ** Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. Nathaniel Morris, a Nevada 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 in violation of the Eighth Amendment. * 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). 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 Morris failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant was deliberately indifferent to Morris’s alleged infection. See id. at 1057 (stating that a prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health and safety); Franklin v. Or., State Welfare Div., 662 F.2d 1337, 1344 (9th Cir. 1981) (“A difference of opinion between a prisoner-patient and prison medical authorities regarding treatment does not give rise to a § 1983 claim.”). Morris’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. DS/Research 2 09-15425