Christopher Grindling v. Todd Thomas

Good Law
475 F. App'x 172
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 26, 201211-15615California370 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Chris B. Grindling, a Hawaii 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 and denial of his First Amendment rights. 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 on Grindling’s deliberate indifference claim because Grindling failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Bowden knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to his health in determining whether to treat his Hepatitis C. See id. at 1058 (prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and disregard an excessive risk to inmate health, and a difference of opinion concerning the appropriate course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Grindling’s First Amendment claim because Grindling failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the grievance restriction imposed on him was reasonably related to legitimate…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.