# Frederick Jost v. Jerry Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · March 5, 2012 · 470 F. App'x 686

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/624331

## Case

- **Full name:** Frederick Karl JOST, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jerry BROWN, Attorney General; Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 5, 2012
- **Citations:** 470 F. App'x 686
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Fernandez, McKeown, Bybee
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/624331

## Opinion text

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 05 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FREDERICK KARL JOST, No. 11-15207

Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00507-GBC

v.
MEMORANDUM *
JERRY BROWN, Attorney General; et al.,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Gerald B. Cohn, Magistrate Judge, Presiding **

Submitted February 21, 2012 ***

Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Frederick Karl Jost, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate

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

**
Jost consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(c).
***
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

for failure to state a claim, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000),

and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because Jost failed to allege

facts showing that defendants acted with deliberate indifference regarding the

denial of his request for soft soled shoes. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051,

1058 (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).

Jost’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

2 11-15207

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/624331. Public record. Not legal advice.