HOWARD COCHRAN V. ANDREAS THUDE, No. 20-15032 (9th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED DEC 16 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HOWARD COCHRAN, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 20-15032 Plaintiff-Appellant, v. D.C. No. 2:18-cv-00690-MTL MEMORANDUM* ANDREAS THUDE, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Michael T. Liburdi, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 2, 2020** Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges. Arizona state prisoner Howard Cochran 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. * 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). We affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Cochran failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Thude was deliberately indifferent to Cochran’s wrist pain. See id. at 1057-60 (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health; medical malpractice, negligence, or a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference). AFFIRMED. 2 20-15032

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.