Robert Dale Alexander v. Max Williams;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERT DALE ALEXANDER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MAX WILLIAMS; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees,
And
FRANKE,
Defendant.
No. 15-35181
D.C. No. 2:13-cv-01176-PK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Michael H. Simon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Oregon state prisoner Robert Dale Alexander appeals pro se from the district
FILED
JUN 24 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants
were deliberately indifferent 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. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendant
Gruenwald because Alexander failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as
to whether Gruenwald was deliberately indifferent to his colitis and proctitis. See
id. at 1058, 1060 (deliberate indifference is a high legal standard; medical
malpractice, negligence, or a difference of opinion concerning the course of
treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference.)
We reject as without merit Alexander’s contention that the district court
failed to consider his evidence.
AFFIRMED.
15-35181 2

-- 2 of 2 --