NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 26 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MIGUEL TORRES, No. 21-15412

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:18-cv-00188-NONE-

SAB

v.

ISMAIL PATEL, Dr. at KVSP; W. ULIT, MEMORANDUM* Dr. at KVSP; MARTA SPAETH, CP&S;

MANASRAH, R.N.; B. JOHN; UPPAL; S.

SERDA; SPECIAL APPEARANCE,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 17, 2022**

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Miguel Torres 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.

* 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). § 1291. We review de novo. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.

2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Torres failed

to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Patel was

deliberately indifferent to his hypertension. See id. at 1057-60 (explaining that a

prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards

an excessive risk to inmate health; medical malpractice, negligence, or a difference

of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate

indifference).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2 21-15412