Howard Lee White v. Romeo Aranas;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HOWARD LEE WHITE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ROMEO ARANAS; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
ISIDRO BACA, Warden; et al.,
Defendants.
No. 18-16899
D.C. No. 3:15-cv-00573-MMD-
WGC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Miranda M. Du, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 7, 2019**
Before: FARRIS, TROTT, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Howard Lee White, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
* 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
JUN 11 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
court’s summary judgment in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate
indifference to his serious medical needs and negligence. 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 because White failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were
deliberately indifferent or negligent to White’s dietary needs. 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); see also LeMaire v. Maass, 12 F.3d 1444, 1456 (9th Cir. 1993);
DeBoer v. Senior Bridges of Sparks Family Hosp., 282 P.3d 727, 732 (Nev. 2012)
(setting forth the elements of a traditional negligence claim under Nevada law).
White’s motion to substitute party (Docket Entry No. 16) is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --