Ilijumkuc MACON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. ELLIOTT, Psychiatrist at California Men's Colony (CMC), individual/official capacity, Defendant-Appellee.
Decided: November 16, 2020
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Ilijumkuc Macon, Pro Se
California state prisoner Ilijumkuc Macon appeals pro se from the district court's order denying him in forma pauperis status and dismissing for failure to state a claim 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 for an abuse of discretion the denial of in forma pauperis status. O'Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 1990). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Macon in forma pauperis status because Macon failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendant was deliberately indifferent to Macon's mental health needs and the side effects of Macon's medication. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-60 (9th Cir. 2004) (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health; a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment, medical malpractice, and negligence in diagnosing or treating a medical condition do not amount to deliberate indifference).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
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.