NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 30 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIO MARTINEZ ARIAS, No. 18-17101
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:14-cv-00764-LJO-BAM
v.
MEMORANDUM*
A. JOHAL, Medical Doctor at North Kern
State Prison; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 21, 2019**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit
Judges.
Mario Martinez Arias, 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 a serious medical need. We have jurisdiction under 28
*
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).
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th
Cir. 2004). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Arias failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Johal was
deliberately indifferent to Arias’s need for post-operative treatment of his right
foot. See id. at 1057-60 (difference of opinion concerning course of treatment,
medical malpractice, or negligence in diagnosing or treating a medical condition
does not amount to deliberate indifference).
We reject as meritless Arias’s contention that the district court erred by not
considering his statements as qualified medical opinions.
AFFIRMED.
2 18-17101