NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 26 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MIGUEL TORRES, No. 21-15412 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:18-cv-00188-NONE- SAB v. ISMAIL PATEL, Dr. at KVSP; W. ULIT, MEMORANDUM* Dr. at KVSP; MARTA SPAETH, CP&S; MANASRAH, R.N.; B. JOHN; UPPAL; S.

SERDA; SPECIAL APPEARANCE, Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 17, 2022** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Miguel Torres 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.

* 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).

§ 1291. We review de novo. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Torres failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Patel was deliberately indifferent to his hypertension. See id. at 1057-60 (explaining that 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).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or 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 21-15412