
    Guadalupe B. GUERRA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Derral G. ADAMS, Warden, Corcoran State Prison; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 11-15995.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 17, 2012.
    
    Filed April 27, 2012.
    Guadalupe B. Guerra, Soledad, CA, pro se.
    Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.Ápp. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Guadalupe B. Guerra appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A or 1915 (e) (2) (B) (ii). Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). We affirm.

After giving Guerra specific notice of the deficiencies in his original complaint and leave to amend, the district court properly dismissed Guerra’s action because the amended complaint contained the same deficiencies as the original complaint. See Arnold, v. Int’l Bus. Machs. Corp., 637 F.2d 1350, 1355 (9th Cir.1981) (to bring § 1983 claim, plaintiff must link each named defendant with some affirmative act or omission that demonstrates a violation of plaintiffs constitutional rights).

We do not consider allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir.2009) (per curiam). These new allegations must be raised, if at all, in a separate action.

Guerra’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

All pending motions are denied.

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