NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 20 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AARON L. STRIBLING, No. 17-15698
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:15-cv-03336-YGR
v.
MEMORANDUM*
BROCK, Psychologist, Salinas Valley State
Prison; MAHAN, Psychologist, Salinas
Valley State Prison,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 15, 2017**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Aaron L. Stribling 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. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
*
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).
§ 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 on Stribling’s
deliberate indifference claim concerning his mental health treatment because
Stribling failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants
knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to his health. See id. at 1057-60 (prison
officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and disregard an
excessive risk to an inmate’s health; a difference of opinion between a prisoner and
medical authorities regarding the appropriate course of treatment, negligence, or
medical malpractice do not amount to deliberate indifference).
We do not consider Stribling’s arguments concerning discovery issues in the
district court that were raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright,
587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 17-15698