MEMORANDUM **

Baron John Badillo, 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 medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d *246 813, 815-16 (9th Cir. 1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Badillo failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Bowman and Ferry were deliberately indifferent to Badillo’s shoulder/back injury. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-58 (9th Cir. 2004) (a prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to the prisoner’s health and safety; negligence and a mere difference in medical opinion are insufficient); Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 746 (9th Cir. 2002) (a prisoner alleging that the delay of medical treatment evinces deliberate indifference must show that the delay led to further injury).

AFFIRMED.