Taggart

MEMORANDUM **

Lyle Perry Taggart, a Montana state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. *546 § 1291 . We review de novo dismissals under both 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Taggart’s claims that the defendants improperly treated him for seizures, and that he should have been able to refuse treatment, because mere disagreement between a prisoner-patient and prison medical personnel over the course of medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference serious medical needs. See Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 242 (9th Cir.1989).

The district court properly dismissed Taggart’s claim that the defendants improperly used shackles to restrain him during his transport from the prison to the hospital, and during his hospital stay, because Taggart failed to allege facts that support a claim that defendants acted unreasonably or…