T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T M A R S H A L L B U R G E S S , J r ., P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. D A V I D M A R ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 17070 D . C . N o . 2 : 0 8 - c v - 1 2 5 1 - R L H - G WF ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

N e va da R oge rL . H unt , C hi e f

D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d A ugus t23, 2010 ** B e f o r e : L E A V Y , H A W K I N S , an dT H O M A S , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . M ar s ha l l B ur ge s s , J r . , aN e va das t a t e pr i s one r , appe a l s pr o s e f r om the d is tr ic t c o u rt’s ju d g m e n t d is m is s in g h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 a c tio n a lle g in g d e lib e r a te in d if f e r e n c e to s e r io u s m e d ic a l n e e d s . W e h av e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . 

# FI LED SEP 07 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 17070 2 § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o , N e ls o n v . H

e is s , 27 1 F . 3d 89 1, 89 3 (9th C i r. 20 01 ), an dw e a f

f i rm. Th e d i s tr i c tc o u rtp r o p e r l yd i s mi s s e dBu r g e s s ’ s s e c t i o n 1 9 8 3 d a ma g e s c l a i ms a ga i ns tpr i s on of

f i c i a l s i n the i rof

f i c i a l c apa c i ty , and a ga i ns tvar i ous N e va dapr i s on a g e n c ie s , m e d ic a l d e p artm e n ts , an dp h arm a c ie s . Se e W ill v . Mic h . D e

p ’ t o f Sta te P ol i ce , 49 1 U . S . 58 , 71 (198 9) (s t at e off i ci al s a ct i ng i n thei r off

i ci alcapaci ty are n o t p e r s o n s f

o rp u rp o s e s o f

m o n e yd a m a g e s c la im s u n d e rs e c tio n 1 9 8 3 ) ; Montana v . G o ld in , 3 9 4 F .3 d1 1 8 9 , 1 1 9 5 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ( u n le s s th e ys p e c if ic a llyw a iv e th e ir i m m uni ty , s t a t e s and s t a t e a ge nc i e s ar e i m m une unde rthe E l e ve nth A m e ndm e nt fr om pri vat e a ct i on s f

or dam ages or i nj un ct i ve re l i ef i n federa lcourt ). T he di s tr i c tc ourta l s o pr ope r l ydi s m i s s e d B ur ge s s ’ s c l a i m s a ga i ns tvar i ous pri son m edi ca l pers on nel i n thei r i nd i vi du alcapaci t i es because thei r a l l eged m i s di a gnos e s of

hi s f ootand s t om a c h pa i n and a l l e ge d f a i l ur e t o w arn hi m of

the pot e nt i a l s i de e f

f e c t s of pa i n m e di c i ne c ons t i tut e ne gl i ge nc e a tm os t , and not d e lib e r a te in d if

f e r e n c e . Se e T

oguc hiv . Chung , 39 1 F . 3d 10 51 , 10 60 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ). M o re o v er , n eith erth e d iffe re n ce inm ed ical o p in io n b etw ee n B u rg es s’s tr e a t i ng phy s i c i ans norB ur ge s s ’ s ow n di s a gr e e m e ntw i th the i rc hos e n c our s e of tr e a tm e n t is s u f

f ic ie n t to e s tab lis h d e lib e r a te in d if f e r e n c e . Se e i d. a t1058.09- 17070 3 T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n de ny i ng B ur ge s s ’ s m ot i on f o rle a v e to f

ile as e c o n da m e n d e dc o m p la in t a f te rf in d in g th a t th e d e f

ic ie n c ie s in h is f ir s t a m e n d e dc o m p la in t c o u ldn o t b e c u r e db ya m e n d m e n t. See Kenda l l v. V isa , 51 8 F . 3d 10 42 , 10 51 -52 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). W e d ecl i n e t o reach ap p el l ees’ rem ai n i n g co n t en t i o n s. A FFI R M ED .