
    Salvador SOLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daniel PARAMO, Warden; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 13-56256.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 25, 2014.
    
    Filed June 30, 2014.
    Salvador Solis, San Diego, CA, pro se.
    Before: HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Salvador Solis 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. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Solis’s action because Solis failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants acted with deliberate indifference to his pain following knee surgery. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057-58, 1060 (9th Cir.2004) (deliberate indifference is a high legal standard, and is met only if the defendant knows of and disregards an excessive risk to the inmate’s health; a mere difference in opinion concerning the course of treatment is insufficient).

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