Badillo v. Santa Clara Valley Health & Hospital Services

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUL 15 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
BARON JOHN BADILLO, No. 09-15843
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:05-CV-03370-WHA
v.
MEMORANDUM *
SANTA CLARA VALLEY HEALTH &
HOSPITAL SERVICES, ADULT
CUSTODY HEALTH SERVICES; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William H. Alsup, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 12, 2011 **
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Baron John Badillo, 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 his 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 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).
§ 1291. We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815-16 (9th Cir.
1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Badillo
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Bowman and Ferry
were deliberately indifferent to Badillo’s shoulder/back injury. See Toguchi v.
Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-58 (9th Cir. 2004) (a prison official acts with
deliberate indifference only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk
to the prisoner’s health and safety; negligence and a mere difference in medical
opinion are insufficient); Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 746 (9th Cir. 2002) (a
prisoner alleging that the delay of medical treatment evinces deliberate indifference
must show that the delay led to further injury).
AFFIRMED.
2 09-15843