Court Opinion

ID: 9381009
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-21 19:00:51.279524+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:29.009055
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MAR 21 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ABEL P. REYES,                                  No. 22-15232

                Plaintiff-Appellant,            D.C. No. 1:19-cv-01158-DAD-HBK

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
PATRICIA ROUCH, Nurse Practitioner at
Corcoran State Prison; OLIVIA
BORBOLLA, Registered Nurse at Corcoran
State Prison; EDGAR CLARK, Medical
Doctor at Corcoran State Prison; G.
RODRIGUEZ, Registered Nurse at Corcoran
State Prison,

                Defendants-Appellees.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Eastern District of California
                    Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted March 14, 2023**

Before:      SILVERMAN, SUNG, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.

      Abel P. Reyes appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical

needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district

court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113,

1118 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

      The district court properly dismissed Reyes’s action because Reyes failed to

allege facts sufficient to show that defendants were deliberately indifferent to

Reyes’s pain, elevated blood pressure, and withdrawal symptoms. See Hebbe v.

Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are

construed liberally, plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a

plausible claim for relief); Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-60 (9th Cir.

2004) (prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and

disregard a risk to the prisoner’s health; medical malpractice, negligence or

difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to

deliberate indifference); Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 746 (9th Cir. 2002) (a

prisoner alleging deliberate indifference based on delay in treatment must show

that the delay caused significant harm).

      We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

                                           2                                     22-15232
      Reyes’s request for an order revoking defendants’ medical licenses and

certifications, set forth in the opening brief, is denied.

      AFFIRMED.

                                            3                             22-15232