Case Name: Danny Jay ROMERO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VARGO; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-06
Citations: 471 F. App'x 584
Docket Number: No. 10-36096
Parties: Danny Jay ROMERO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VARGO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 471
Pages: 584–585

Head Matter:
Danny Jay ROMERO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VARGO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-36096.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 21, 2012.
Filed March 6, 2012.
Danny Jay Romero, Salem, OR, pro se.
Jeremy Rice, Oregon Department of Justice, Salem, OR, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Danny Jay Romero, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to 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). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Romero did not raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were deliberately indifferent in treating his foot pain. See id. at 1057-58 (prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and disregard an excessive risk to a prisoner's health; a difference of opinion about the best course of medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).
Romero's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.