*1 Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Ramiro Vela, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in 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, Toguchi v. Chung , 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we *2 affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Vela failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were deliberately indifferent by changing his hypertension medication. See id . at 1057-60 (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to an inmate’s health; medical malpractice, negligence, or a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).

AFFIRMED.

2 15-15432

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

[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).