Roberto Juarez v. R. Rocamora;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERTO JUAREZ,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
R. ROCAMORA; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-15642
D.C. No. 3:12-cv-02800-WHO
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William H. Orrick, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 26, 2016**
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Roberto Juarez, a California state prisoner, 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.
FILED
AUG 03 2016
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 --

2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Juarez failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were
deliberately indifferent to his injured wrist. See id. at 1057-60 (a prison official is
deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk
to an inmate’s health; medical malpractice, negligence, or a difference of opinion
concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).
Contrary to Juarez’s contention, the district court’s decision did not rest on
the grievance responder’s misstatement that Juarez was capable of playing
basketball.
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).
AFFIRMED.
2 15-15642

-- 2 of 2 --