Eddie Rencher, Jr. v. Robert Bannister

Good Law
543 F. App'x 697
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 201319-17214California505 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Nevada state prisoner Eddie Rencher, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent 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). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Rencher failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs when they provided him with allegedly expired syringes for his insulin injections. See Jett v. Fenner, 439 F.3d 1091, 1096 (9th Cir.2006) (a claim for deliberate indifference to an inmate’s serious medical needs requires showing a purposeful act or failure to respond to inmate’s pain or possible medical need, and harm caused by the indifference); Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 627 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that' the Prison Litigation Reform Act “requires a prior showing of physical injury that need not be significant but must be more than de minimis ”); see also Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202, 1207-08 (9th Cir. 2011)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.