Charles Reece v. Alvaro Traquina
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Charles G. Reece, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that Traquina was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir.2010), and for an abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend, Gordon v. City of Oakland, 627 F.3d 1092, 1094-95 (9th Cir.2010). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.
The district court properly dismissed, without leave to amend, Reece’s claim that Traquina violated his constitutional rights by not ensuring that a nurse was available to take blood pressure in a specific location in the prison on certain dates in May and June 2010, because there is no allegation that Traquina was personally involved in any alleged lack of availability of a nurse at a particular location, and the complaint and attachments thereto showed that Reece was aware of and utilized alternative locations in the prison for testing his blood pressure. See Jeffers v. Gomez, 267 F.3d 895, 915 (9th Cir.2001) (supervisory…