Warren Cleveland Green v. Galen H. Church

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WARREN CLEVELAND GREEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
GALEN H. CHURCH; J. AGARWAL,
Dr.; MONTAUK, Dr.; MICHAEL
MARTEL, Warden; ANISE ADAMS,
Chief Medical Executive; AKINTOLA,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-15249
D.C. No.
2:18-cv-01931-WBS-KJN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 25, 2021**
Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges
Warren Green appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in
favor of Dr. Agarwal in Green’s prisoner civil rights action alleging deliberate
FILED
OCT 27 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 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 --

indifference to a serious medical need. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo, Jett v. Penner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir. 2006),
and affirm.
Summary judgment was proper for the defendant. At most, Green
established a difference of opinion between himself and the medical professionals
regarding diagnosis and treatment of his serious medical need. Such a difference
of opinion does not rise to the level of deliberate indifference. Toguchi v. Chung,
391 F.3d 1051, 1058 (9th Cir. 2004); Sanchez v. Vild, 891 F.2d 240, 242 (9th Cir.
1989). Nor would negligence rise to the level of deliberate indifference. Jett, 439
F.3d at 1096.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --