United States v. 2020-12-15 | 18-17166 | MELINDA VALENZUELA V. KATAUSHIA THOMAS | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MELINDA GABRIELLA VALENZUELA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

KATAUSHIA THOMAS, Facility Health
Administrator at Lewis Complex; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-17166

D.C. No. 2:17-cv-00635-DLR

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Douglas L. Rayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 2, 2020
**

Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Melinda Gabriella Valenzuela 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

*
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).
FILED

DEC 15 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2 18-17166
(9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Valenzuela
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were
deliberately indifferent to her back 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 difference of opinion
concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).
We do not consider documents not presented to the district court. See
United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990).
Valenzuela’s motion to order appellees to provide correct addresses (Docket
Entry No. 34) is denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.