Craig Weighall v. Doug Waddington

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 01 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CRAIG F. WEIGHALL, No. 09-35026 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:06-cv-01675-RSM v. MEMORANDUM * DOUG WADDINGTON, Superintendent, Stafford Creek Corrections Center; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Ricardo S. Martinez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 16, 2010 ** Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. Washington state prisoner Craig F. Weighall appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). LSS/Research indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a grant of summary judgment. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Weighall did not raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the defendants’ chosen course of treatment of his amputation site was medically unacceptable. See id. at 1058 (holding that a difference of opinion about the best course of medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference). AFFIRMED. LSS/Research 2 09-35026