DANNY ROMERO V. VARGO, No. 10-36096 (9th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED MAR 06 2012 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DANNY JAY ROMERO, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 10-36096 D.C. No. 3:07-cv-06083-MO v. MEMORANDUM * VARGO; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael W. Mosman, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 21, 2012 ** Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Danny Jay Romero, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to 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 Romero did not raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were deliberately indifferent in treating his foot pain. See id. 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). Romero s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 2 10-36096
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.
