John Thomas ENTLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roy GONZALES, Dept of Corrections Manager; Bernard Warner, Former Secretary of DOC, Defendants-Appellees.
Decided: October 21, 2019
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
John Thomas Entler, Pro Se Marko Luka Pavela, State Attorney General's Office - Corrections Division, Olympia, WA, for Defendants-Appellees
Washington state prisoner John Thomas Entler appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his safety. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Thomas v. Ponder, 611 F.3d 1144, 1149 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Entler failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to Entler’s safety. See Foster v. Runnels, 554 F.3d 807, 814 (9th Cir. 2009) (“To establish a prison official’s deliberate indifference, an inmate must show that the official was aware of a risk to the inmate’s safety and that the official deliberately disregarded the risk.”); see also Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 844, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (“[P]rison officials who actually knew of a substantial risk to inmate health or safety may be found free from liability if they responded reasonably to the risk[.]”).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.