Giraldes

MEMORANDUM **

Larry Giraldes, Jr., a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation and med *886 ical deliberate indifference in violation of the First and Eighth Amendments. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Jett v. Penner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir.2006), and we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Giraldes’s Eighth Amendment claims regarding his knee condition and need for pain management because Giraldes failed to raise a triable issue as to whether defendants’ chosen course of treatment was medically unacceptable under the circumstances. See To-guehi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1058 (9th Cir.2004).

As for the remaining Eighth Amendment claims, the district court’s ruling was based on (1) defendants’ showing that Gir-aldes was provided some treatment and referred to a specialist, and (2) Giraldes’s failure to establish that he was denied treatment altogether. Although Giraldes admitted that the defendants provided some treatment, he argued that the treatment provided was medically unacceptable…