
    Steve W. CHENNAULT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MORRIS, Registered Dietician, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 16-55878
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted September 26, 2017 
    
    OCTOBER 5, 2017
    Steve W. Chennault, pro se
    
      Terry Price, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed, R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Steve W. Chennault appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. 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 Chennault failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Appellee was deliberately indifferent in providing care following Chennault’s tonsillectomy or otherwise personally participated in the deprivation of his constitutional rights. See id. at 1057 (a prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to an inmate’s health); see also Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202, 1207 (9th Cir. 2011) (a supervisor is liable under § 1983 only if he or she is personally involved in the constitutional deprivation or there is a “sufficient causal connection between the supervisor’s wrongful conduct and the constitutional violation” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     