Santos

Santos v. D'Amico

Good Law
124 F. App'x 509
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 14, 2005No. 04-15412California300 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Ronald R. Santos, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs by inadequately treating his Hepatitis C infection, and by confiscating his back brace. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Jackson v. City of Bremerton, 268 F.3d 646, 650 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Santos’ deliberate indifference claims because Santos failed to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether additional testing of his fiver, additional inoculations, or more aggressive treatment was medically necessary. See Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 242 (9th Cir.1989) (indicating that a difference of opinion about a course of medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference to serious medical needs). Similarly, Santos failed to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the defendants were deliberately indifferent in confiscating his back brace, given that he was evaluated many times for his back ailments, and there was no…

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.