ROBERT ALEXANDER V. MAX WILLIAMS, No. 15-35181 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 24 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROBERT DALE ALEXANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 15-35181 D.C. No. 2:13-cv-01176-PK v. MEMORANDUM* MAX WILLIAMS; et al., Defendants - Appellees, And FRANKE, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael H. Simon, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 14, 2016** Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Oregon state prisoner Robert Dale Alexander appeals pro se from the district * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent 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), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendant Gruenwald because Alexander failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Gruenwald was deliberately indifferent to his colitis and proctitis. See id. at 1058, 1060 (deliberate indifference is a high legal standard; medical malpractice, negligence, or a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference.) We reject as without merit Alexander’s contention that the district court failed to consider his evidence. AFFIRMED. 2 15-35181
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
