Herron Adams v. Lina Manglicmot ( 2022 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 20 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HERRON A. ADAMS, No. 21-16554
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:19-cv-07952-HSG
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LINA MANGLICMOT, Registered Nurse at
Correctional Training Facility; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 12, 2022**
Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Herron A. Adams appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate
indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§1291. We review de novo. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004).
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Adams failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants Manglicmot
and Anudokem were deliberately indifferent to Adams’s history of seizures and his
requests for a lower bunk accommodation and pain medication. See id. at 1057-60(prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and disregard
a risk to the prisoner’s health; medical malpractice, negligence or difference of
opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate
indifference).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 21-16554