The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
21-15583•DEMETRIUS A. WILSON, AKA Demetrius Antwon Wilson v. JEFFREY ALVAREZ, Director of C.H.S. Medical at Maricopa County, individual
21-15583Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFeb 25, 2022
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEMETRIUS A. WILSON, AKA Demetrius
Antwon Wilson,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JEFFREY ALVAREZ, Director of C.H.S.
Medical at Maricopa County, individual and
official capacity; MARICOPA COUNTY,
Maricopa County Hospital/Jail; KAROLE
DAVIS, Surgeon at Maricopa County
Hospital, individual and official capacity;
ERIC THOMAS, Surgeon at Maricopa
County Hospital, individual and official
capacity; ANUPAMA BALAJI, Medical
Provider at Maricopa County Jail, individual
and official capacity; JOSEPH M. ARPAIO,
Sheriff over Maricopa County Jail, individual
and official capacity; LAYLA SHANAH,
Surgeon at Maricopa County Hospital,
individual and official capacity; MEREDITH
HEBERER, Surgeon at Maricopa County
Hospital, individual and official capacity;
MARGARET SALAS, Provider at A.D.O.C.
Tucson/Manzanita, individual and official
capacity; NATALIE BELL, Provider at
A.D.O.C. Tucson/Rincon, individual and
official capacity; ALICE WARREN,
Provider at A.D.O.C. Tucson/Whetstone,
No. 21-15583
D.C. No. 4:19-cv-00257-RCC
MEMORANDUM*
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
FILED
FEB 25 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 3 --
2 21-15583
individual and official capacity; MARICOPA
COUNTY HOSPITAL, Institution, Maricopa
County Hospital Integrated Health System;
STATE OF ARIZONA, Institution of
Arizona; SUPERIOR COURT OF
ARIZONA IN MARICOPA COUNTY,
Court/Judge, Institution; MARICOPA
CORRECTIONAL HEALTH SERVICE
ADMINISTRATION, Maricopa Correctional
Health Service Administration, Institution,
Maricopa County Jail; ARIZONA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
CORIZON HEALTH, Institution; CORIZON
MEDICAL, Institution, Corizon Medical
A.D.O.C.; MARICOPA COUNTY JAIL,
Institution; CHARLES RYAN, Director of
A.D.O.C., individual and official capacity;
TRACY NOLAN, Corizon Administration
Institution, Arizona department Corrections,
individual and official capacity; KAREY
WITTY, Corizon Administration Institution,
Arizona department Corrections, individual
and official capacity; B. ANDERSON
FLATT, Corizon Administration Institution,
Arizona department Corrections, individual
and official capacity; AYODEJI LADELE,
Regional Medical Director for Corizon,
individual and official capacity; SALAZAR,
Doctor, Tucson Corizon, individual and
official capacity; DAVID SHINN, Director,
in his official capacity only,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding
-- 2 of 3 --
3 21-15583
Submitted February 15, 2022**
San Francisco, California
Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Arizona state prisoner Demetrius A. Wilson 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.
2004). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Wilson failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were
deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. See id. at 1060-61 (holding
deliberate indifference is a high legal standard requiring a defendant be aware of
and disregard an excessive risk to an inmate’s health).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
All pending requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.