Watts

MEMORANDUM

Timothy L. Watts (“Watts”), a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the defendant prison employees in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action. Watts claimed that the defendants violated the Eighth Amendment by showing deliberate indifference toward his serious medical needs on three occasions. Watts claimed that defendants violated his First Amendment rights by retaliating against him for grievances he had filed against them. We review de novo the district court’s award of summary judgment. See Robi v. Reed, 173 F.3d 736, 739 (9th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 952 , 120 S.Ct. 375 , 145 L.Ed.2d 293 (1999). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

Watts claimed that, on three occasions, defendants were deliberately indifferent to his asthma. Because disagreement with diagnoses and allegations of de minimis pain are insufficient as a matter of law to demonstrate deliberate indifference, the district court did not err by granting summary judgment on Watt’s Eighth Amendment claims. Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 , 112 S.Ct. 995 , 117 L.Ed.2d 156 (1992); Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 242 (9th…