MEMORANDUM **

John Patrick Kelly, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging that a photo was taken of his genitals during a medical procedure without his consent. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal on the basis of qualified immunity. Kwai Fun Wong v. United States, 373 F.3d 952, 966 n. 18 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Kelly’s action because defendant is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to Kelly’s claim that defendant’s conduct violated Kelly’s Eighth Amendment rights. See Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (defendant is entitled to qualified immunity unless the conduct at issue violated a clearly established constitutional right).

We do not consider matters neither developed in the district court nor specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.