ALLEN v. TYLER (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Michael Nathaniel ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TYLER, Nurse Practitioner; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-16455

Decided: September 26, 2019

Before: FARRIS, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Michael Nathaniel Allen, Pro Se Martha P. Ehlenbach, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Defendants-Appellees

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Michael Nathaniel Allen appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in 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. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Allen failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were deliberately indifferent to Allen's back pain in ordering the removal of Allen's wheelchair. See id. at 1057-60 (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to the prisoner's health; a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).

We treat Allen's “First Amendment Brief for Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Plaintiff's Response to Defendant[’s] Motion for Summary Judgment” (Docket Entry No. 29) as his reply brief.

AFFIRMED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law