Jaime Ignacio Estrada v. C. Malo Clines

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAIME IGNACIO ESTRADA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
C. MALO CLINES,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 12-17044
D.C. No. 5:10-cv-04832-LHK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Lucy Koh, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 18, 2014**
Before: ALARCÓN, O’SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Jaime Ignacio Estrada appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
deliberate indifference to his back pain and related medical needs. We have
FILED
MAR 03 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

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 Estrada did
not raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant’s decisions
regarding Estrada’s treatment for his back pain were “medically unacceptable
under the circumstances, and [were] chosen in conscious disregard of an excessive
risk to [Estrada’s] health.” Id. at 1058 (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted) (a difference in medical opinion does not rise to the level of deliberate
indifference). Estrada also failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to
whether defendant was deliberately indifferent to his need for a particular bunk
placement. See id. at 1060 (deliberate indifference is a high legal standard; mere
negligence does not suffice).
Estrada’s requests for judicial notice, filed on April 8, 2013, and January 15,
2014, are denied.
AFFIRMED.
12-17044 2

-- 2 of 2 --