JOHN JACKSON V. N. AKABIKE, No. 22-16109 (9th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED DEC 16 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN H. JACKSON, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 22-16109 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:19-cv-01442-JLT-EPG v. MEMORANDUM* N. AKABIKE, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Jennifer L. Thurston, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 8, 2022** Before: WALLACE, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner John H. Jackson appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to her 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), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Jackson failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant was deliberately indifferent in treating Jackson’s stomach issues. 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); Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 746 (9th Cir. 2002) (a prisoner alleging deliberate indifference based on delay in treatment must show that the delay caused significant harm). We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). We do not consider documents not filed with the district court. See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990). AFFIRMED. 2 22-16109

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.