Mikeal Stine v. B. Von Blankensee

facts to state a plausible claim); Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-60 (9th

Cir. 2004) (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of

and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health; medical malpractice, negligence,

or a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to

deliberate indifference). Stine’s deliberate indifference claim seeking injunctive

and declaratory relief has become moot because Stine was transferred to another

prison. See Nelson v. Heiss, 271 F.3d 891, 897 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[W]hen a prisoner

is moved from a prison, his action will usually become moot as to conditions at

that particular facility.”).

In his opening brief, Stine failed to address the grounds for dismissal of his

access-to-courts claim and has therefore waived any such challenge. See Indep.

Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003) (explaining that

“we will not consider any claims that were not actually argued in appellant’s

22-16142 opening brief”).

A prior panel of this court affirmed the district court’s order denying

preliminary injunctive relief, see Appeal No.…