FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

OCT 27 2021

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WARREN CLEVELAND GREEN, No. 21-15249

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:18-cv-01931-WBS-KJN v.

GALEN H. CHURCH; J. AGARWAL, MEMORANDUM*

Dr.; MONTAUK, Dr.; MICHAEL MARTEL, Warden; ANISE ADAMS, Chief Medical Executive; AKINTOLA,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 25, 2021**

Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges

Warren Green appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in

favor of Dr. Agarwal in Green’s prisoner civil rights action alleging deliberate

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). indifference to a serious medical need. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291. We review de novo, Jett v. Penner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir. 2006),

and affirm.

Summary judgment was proper for the defendant. At most, Green

established a difference of opinion between himself and the medical professionals

regarding diagnosis and treatment of his serious medical need. Such a difference

of opinion does not rise to the level of deliberate indifference. Toguchi v. Chung,

391 F.3d 1051, 1058 (9th Cir. 2004); Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 242 (9th Cir.

1989). Nor would negligence rise to the level of deliberate indifference. Jett, 439

F.3d at 1096.

AFFIRMED.

2