Case Name: Shawn Laray BELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SANTA ANA CITY JAIL; 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 566
Docket Number: No. 10-55363
Parties: Shawn Laray BELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SANTA ANA CITY JAIL; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 471
Pages: 566–566

Head Matter:
Shawn Laray BELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SANTA ANA CITY JAIL; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-55363.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 21, 2012.
March 6, 2012.
Shawn Laray Bell, Sheridan, OR, pro se.
Henry C. Truszkowski, Esquire, Stephen L. Hewitt, Esquire, Hewitt & Truszkowski, North Hollywood, CA, 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
Federal prisoner Shawn Laray Bell 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 arising from his detention in a city jail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Bell failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he suffered from a serious medical condition related to an ulcer during the relevant time, or whether defendant Coates knew of, and knowingly failed to treat him for, the same. See id. at 1057 (prisoner's deliberate indifference claim requires that medical condition at issue be objectively serious and that prison officials subjectively knew of it, but deliberately failed to provide adequate medical care).
Bell'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.