Lorenzo Fosselman v. Randolph Gibbs
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Lorenzo Fosselman, a California state prisoner, 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 Fosselman failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants Brager, Lee, and Kates were aware of his need for surgery and therefore responsible for its delay. See id. at 1057 (no deliberate indifference unless prison officials know of and disregard an excessive risk to inmate health or safety).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to continue defendants’ summary judgment motion because Fosselman failed to explain how the additional information he sought would have been essential to defeat summary judgment. See California ex rel. Cal. Dep’t of Toxic Substances Control v. Campbell, 138 F.3d 772, 779-80 (9th Cir.1998) (reviewing for an abuse of discretion and setting forth relevant factors).