Steven Leon Joyce v. Stewart Sherman; Winfred M. Kokor; Powell

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
STEVEN LEON JOYCE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
STEWART SHERMAN; WINFRED M.
KOKOR; POWELL,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-16032
D.C. No. 1:20-cv-01324-DAD-SAB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 11, 2022**
Before: McKEOWN, CHRISTEN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Steven Leon Joyce appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing 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. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir.
* 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
APR 20 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-16032
2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108,
1112 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Joyce’s action because Joyce failed to
allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim of deliberate indifference in
diagnosing and treating his Valley Fever. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-
42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, a plaintiff
must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim); Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d
1051, 1057-60 (9th Cir. 2004) (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); Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d
732, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2002) (to establish a claim of deliberate indifference arising
from delay in providing care, a plaintiff must show that the delay was harmful).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --