Swoop
Walter Cole v. Swoop
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Walter L. Cole appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment as a matter of law in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Torres v. City of Los Angeles, 548 F.3d 1197, 1205 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted judgment as a matter of law because, based on the evidence presented at trial, no reasonable juror could find that appel-lees were deliberately indifferent to Cole’s knee and asthma conditions. See id. (judgment as a matter of law is proper “ ‘if no reasonable juror could find in the non-moving party’s favor’ ” (citation omitted)); Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057, 1060 (9th Cir.2004) (deliberate indifference is a “high legal standard” and prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and disregard an excessive risk to the prisoner’s health and safety); Franklin v. Oregon, 662 F.2d 1337, 1344 (9th Cir.1981) (“A difference of opinion between a prisoner-patient and prison medical authorities regarding treatment does not give rise to a § 1983 claim.”).