Michael T. Ryan v. Corizon;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MICHAEL T. RYAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CORIZON; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-17200
D.C. No. 2:18-cv-02596-DJH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Diane J. Humetewa, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 14, 2021**
Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Arizona state prisoner Michael T. Ryan 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
* 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
SEP 23 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-17200
(9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Ryan failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Weigel was
deliberately indifferent in the treatment of Ryan’s knee injury. See id. at 1057-60
(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 Ryan’s contention he was improperly denied
discovery.
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Ryan’s motion for status update (Docket Entry No. 24) is denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --