FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HENRY MANSON, III, No. 11-15821
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:07-cv-00437-OWW-
GSA
v.
DAVID G. SMITH, M.D.; AVINDRA MEMORANDUM *
BRAR, M.D.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Oliver W. Wanger, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 13, 2012 **
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Henry Manson, III, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary
judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison medical staff were
deliberately indifferent to his left shoulder injuries. We have jurisdiction under 28
*
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).
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 for defendants Brar
and Smith because Manson failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to
whether these defendants knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to Manson’s
health and safety, and the undisputed evidence shows that these defendants
provided Manson treatment that they believed was appropriate based on their
diagnoses. See id. at 1057-58 (explaining that a prison official is deliberately
indifferent only if he knows of and disregards an excessive risk to an inmate’s
health and safety, mere negligence in diagnosing or treating a medical condition
does not constitute deliberate indifference, and where there is a difference of
medical opinion, a prisoner must show that the chosen course of treatment was
both medically unacceptable under the circumstance and chosen in disregard of an
excessive risk to his health).
AFFIRMED.
2 11-15821