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 pa ne l una ni 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 S T E VE N V L AS I C H, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. J E S U S J U A R E Z ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 15974 D . C. N o . 1 : 0 5 - c v - 0 1 6 1 5 - LJ O - G SA 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 o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia L a w r e nc e J . O ’ N e i l l , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r19, 2012 ** B efo re: G O O D W IN , W A L L A C E , an dF IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C al i forni a s t at e pri soner S t even V l as i ch appeal s pro se fr om the di stri ct c o u rt’s s u m m a ryju d g m e n t in 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 i n d i f f e r e n c e t o h i s s e r i o u s me d i c a l n e e d s . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. 

# FI LED JAN 02 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 15974 2 § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o , T oguc hiv . Chung , 39 1 F . 3d 10 51 , 10 56 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ) , a n dw e a f

f i rm. T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y grant ed sum m ary j ud gm entbecause V l as i ch fa i l ed t o rai se a genui ne di sput e of m at er i alfa ctas t o w hether defe nd ant s w er e d e lib e r a te lyin d if

f e r e n t to h is s e r io u s m e d ic a l n e e d s in d is c o n tin u in g h is R ita lin m e d ic a tio n . Se e id. a t 1 0 5 8 ( p r is o n o f f ic ia ls a c t w ith d e lib e r a te in d if f e r e n c e o n lyif the yknow of

a nd di s r e ga r d a n e xc e s s i ve r i s k t o i nm a t e he a l th; adi f f e r e nc e of o p in io n c o n c e rn in g th e ap p r o p r ia te c o u r s e o f tr e a tm e n t d o e s n o t am o u n t to del i bera t e i nd i ff

er ence abse nta s ho w i ng thatthe course of tre atm entpres cr i bed w as m edi ca l l y unacc ept abl e) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in d e n y in g V la s ic h ’s m o tio n to c om pe l D r . F i s hba c k t o pr oduc e c opi e s of V l a s i c h’ s l e tt e r s be c aus e the r e w a s no s h o w in g th a t th e d e n ia l o f th e m o tio n r e s u lte din a c tu a l an ds u b s tan tia l p r e ju d ic e . Se e H al le t t v . Mor gan , 29 6 F . 3d 73 2, 75 1 (9th C i r. 20 02 ) ( di stri ctcourt ’ s “ broad di s c r e t i on . . . t o pe rm i torde nydi s c ove ry. . . w i l l notbe di s turbe d e xc e ptupon the cl eare stshow i ng thatdeni alof di sc ov ery r es ul t s i n actual and sub st ant i al prej ud i ce ” ( ci t at i on and i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed)) .11- 15974 3 W e r e je c t V la s ic h ’s c o n te n tio n th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e db yd e n y in g h is m ot i on f orc opi e s a nd gr a nt i ng hi m l e a ve t o f i l e onl yone c opyof

hi s oppos i t i on w i tho utproo f of s ervi ce . W e do n otconsi der on app ea l m at er i al s thatw er e notbefore the di stri ct c o u rt. AF F I RME D.