CESAR URIBE V. BHATT, No. 10-17845 (9th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED MAR 15 2012 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CESAR URIBE, No. 10-17845 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:07-cv-01064-GMS v. MEMORANDUM * BHATT, Physician, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 6, 2012 ** Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. Cesar Uribe, a California state prisoner, 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 * 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). U.S.C. § 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 Uribe did not raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in treating his nausea. See Toguchi, 391 F.3d at 1057-58 (prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know of and disregard an excessive risk to a prisoner s health; a difference of opinion about the best course of medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference absent a showing that the course of treatment prescribed was medically unacceptable). The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Uribe s requests for non-party depositions where the requests were untimely, and there was no showing that the denial of the discovery requests resulted in actual and substantial prejudice. See Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 751 (9th Cir. 2002) (district court s broad discretion . . . to permit or deny discovery . . .will not be disturbed except upon the clearest showing that denial of discovery results in actual and substantial prejudice ) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Uribe s pending motion for leave of court to withhold his identity from public disclosure is denied. However, in response to his motion, the Clerk is 2 10-17845 ordered to seal all records in this case. AFFIRMED. 3 10-17845
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.
