Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): John Patrick McClure, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging prison officials violated his Eighth Amendment rights by acting with deliberate indifference to his medical needs and inflicting cruel and unusual punishment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 241-42 (9th Cir.1989). We affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment on McClure’s deliberate indifference claim because there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether the treatment chosen by prison officials was medically unacceptable. See id. at 242 (<HOLDING>). The district court properly granted summary 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that deliberate indifference to a serious medical need establishes an eighth amendment violation (B) holding that a sentence of incarceration would constitute deliberate indifference to defendants medical needs (C) holding that a difference of medical opinion was insufficient as a matter of law to establish deliberate indifference (D) holding that disagreement with a doctors judgment does not support a claim of deliberate indifference (E) holding that a difference of opinion about the best course of medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference
Output (English): holding that disagreement with a doctors judgment does not support a claim of deliberate indifference