Elghembri

Elghembri v. Doe, Dentist

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 4, 20253:24-cv-02771California939 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 AHMED MOHAMED ELGHEMBRI, Case No. 24-cv-02771-WHO (PR)

Plaintiff,

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.

JANE DOE, DENTIST, et al., Defendants.

12 INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Ahmed Mohamed Elghembri alleges that the refusal of unnamed dentists at San Quentin State Prison to give him a filling constituted deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment. His first amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint containing these allegations is now before me for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Elghembri has failed to state any claim for relief. He thought that he should have his tooth filled; the dentists’ opinion was that the tooth had to be pulled rather than filled and offered to perform that procedure. Elghembri refused the offer. At most, this amounts to a difference of medical opinion concerning the need to pursue one course of treatment over another, which is insufficient as a matter of law to establish deliberate indifference. This civil rights action is DISMISSED.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.