Vargo
Dean Harris v. Vargo
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Oregon state prisoner Dean Philip Harris appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent 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 to Hardy Myers, the former Oregon Attorney General, because Harris failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Myers was personally involved in any alleged deprivation of Harris’s rights. See Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order) (“Liability under § 1983 must be based on the personal involvement of the defendant.”).
The district court properly granted summary judgment to the remaining defendants because Harris failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were deliberately indifferent to his chronic back pain. See Toguchi, 391 F.3d at 1060 (“Deliberate indifference is a high legal standard.”); see also Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1122 (9th Cir.2012) (difference of medical opinion is…