NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 16 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HOWARD COCHRAN, No. 20-15032 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:18-cv-00690-MTL v. MEMORANDUM* ANDREAS THUDE, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Michael T. Liburdi, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 2, 2020** Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Howard Cochran 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.

* 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).

2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Cochran failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Thude was deliberately indifferent to Cochran’s wrist pain. See id. at 1057-60 (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health; medical malpractice, negligence, or a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).

AFFIRMED.

2 20-15032