TRUJILLO v. SANCHEZ (2018)

MEMORANDUM *

Nevada state prisoner Jorge Trujillo appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment enforcing the terms of a settlement agreement in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging medical deliberate indifference. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s enforcement of a settlement agreement. Doi v. Halekulani Corp., 276 F.3d 1131, 1136 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendants’ motion to enforce the oral settlement agreement that the parties reached on March 25, 2016, because Trujillo stated that he understood and agreed to the material terms of the agreement during the settlement conference before a neutral mediator. See id. at 1136-40 (district court did not abuse its discretion in enforcing settlement agreement where material terms of agreement were read into the record and parties agreed to them).

We do not consider Trujillo’s contentions regarding whether the settlement agreement was breached because the district court did not reach this issue.

AFFIRMED.