NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 20 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HERRON A. ADAMS, No. 21-16554

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:19-cv-07952-HSG v.

MEMORANDUM* LINA MANGLICMOT, Registered Nurse at Correctional Training Facility; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 12, 2022** Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Herron A. Adams 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. 2004).

*

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). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Adams failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants Manglicmot and Anudokem were deliberately indifferent to Adams’s history of seizures and his requests for a lower bunk accommodation and pain medication. See id. at 1057-60 (prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and disregard a risk to the prisoner’s health; medical malpractice, negligence or 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 21-16554