Michael Chavez v. James Yates

Good Law
513 F. App'x 680
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 22, 201311-16888California244 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Michael E. Chavez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his medical needs and violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § § 1915A and 1915(e)(2). Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed Chavez’s ADA claim because Chavez failed to allege any denial of service based on his disability. See Lovell v. Chandler, 303 F.3d 1039, 1052 (9th Cir.2002).

However, liberally construed, the allegations in Chavez’s pro se complaint were “sufficient to meet the low threshold for proceeding past the screening stage” where Chavez alleged that defendants were aware of Chavez’s severe pain and refused to treat it. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1123 (9th Cir.2012); see also Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057 (9th Cir.2004) (discussing objective and subjective elements of…

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.