Eric Saldivar v. Michael Sayre

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Eric Henry Saldivar 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. § 1291 . We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Saldivar failed to establish a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether any of the defendants were deliberately indifferent in the treatment of his esophageal varices, motion sickness, and ruptured appendix. See id. at 1060 (“Deliberate indifference is a high legal standard. A showing of medical malpractice or negligence is insufficient to establish a constitutional deprivation under the Eighth Amendment.”); Jackson v. McIntosh, 90 F.3d 330, 332 (9th Cir.1996) (a difference of opinion does not amount to deliberate indifference, unless the prisoner shows that the defendants chose a medically unacceptable course of treatment in conscious disregard of an excessive risk to the prisoner’s health).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Saldivar’s motion for…