Anthony AMMONS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. BAKEWELL; A. Nangalama, Defendants-Appellees, 481 F. App'x 389

MEMORANDUM California state prisoner Anthony Am-mons appeals pro se from, the district court’s

summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm. The district court properly granted

summary judgment because Ammons failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant Bakewell was deliberately indifferent in her treatment of his eye injury. See id. at 1056-60 (discussing deliberate indifference standard). The district court did not abuse its discretion in striking Ammons’s motion for

summary judgment that he filed after the scheduling order deadline because Am-mons failed to show “good cause” for the untimely filing. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607-09 (9th Cir.1992) (stating standard). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.