
    Baron John BADILLO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SANTA CLARA VALLEY HEALTH & HOSPITAL SERVICES, Adult Custody Health Services; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 09-15843.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 12, 2011.
    
    Filed July 15, 2011.
    Baron John Badillo, Corcoran, CA, pro se.
    Kevin Hammon, Esquire, Neysa A. Fli-gor, Esquire, Deputy County Counsel, San Jose, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCON, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Baron John Badillo, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815-16 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Badillo failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Bowman and Ferry were deliberately indifferent to Badillo’s shoulder/back injury. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-58 (9th Cir.2004) (a prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to the prisoner’s health and safety; negligence and a mere difference in medical opinion are insufficient); Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 746 (9th Cir.2002) (a prisoner alleging that the delay of medical treatment evinces deliberate indifference must show that the delay led to further injury).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     