FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
OCT 27 2021
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WARREN CLEVELAND GREEN, No. 21-15249
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No.
2:18-cv-01931-WBS-KJN
v.
GALEN H. CHURCH; J. AGARWAL, MEMORANDUM*
Dr.; MONTAUK, Dr.; MICHAEL
MARTEL, Warden; ANISE ADAMS,
Chief Medical Executive; AKINTOLA,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 25, 2021**
Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges
Warren Green appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in
favor of Dr. Agarwal in Green’s prisoner civil rights 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).
indifference to a serious medical need. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo, Jett v. Penner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir. 2006),
and affirm.
Summary judgment was proper for the defendant. At most, Green
established a difference of opinion between himself and the medical professionals
regarding diagnosis and treatment of his serious medical need. Such a difference
of opinion does not rise to the level of deliberate indifference. Toguchi v. Chung,
391 F.3d 1051, 1058 (9th Cir. 2004); Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 242 (9th Cir.
1989). Nor would negligence rise to the level of deliberate indifference. Jett, 439
F.3d at 1096.
AFFIRMED.
2