Reno Rios v. Connie Gipson

MEMORANDUM

Reno Fuentes Rios, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical and dental needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed Rios’ claims regarding treatment of his cataracts and glaucoma, hearing impairment, dry skin, and plantar fasciitis because Rios failed to allege sufficient facts to show that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his health. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she “knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health”); see also Colwell v. Bannister, 763 F.3d 1060, 1068 (9th Cir.2014) (“A difference of opinion between a physician and the prisoner — or between medical professionals — concerning what…