Block

MEMORANDUM **

Former California state prisoner Ervin Charles St. Amand appeals pro se the district court’s order denying him leave to file his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint in for-ma pauperis. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s dismissal of an in forma pauperis action as frivolous, and we review de novo the district court’s apparent determination that the plaintiffs complaint lacked arguable substance in law or fact. Tripati v. First Nat’l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1369 (9th Cir.1987). We affirm in part, and reverse and remand in part.

The district court denied St. Amand’s application to proceed in forma pauperis on the ground that his claims were frivolous. St. Amand’s Eighth Amendment claims, alleging that the defendants ignored his requests for medical attention for a week resulting in a perforated appendix, refused to follow his doctor’s directions to change his dressing post-surgery, and broke and failed to replace his prosthetic leg, knee brace and surgical support hose, do not appear frivolous. See Hamilton v. Endell, 981 F.2d 1062, 1066 (9th Cir.1992). St. Amand’s Americans with Disabilities Act and…