Eugene Hamilton v. S. White

MEMORANDUM

Former California state prisoner Eugene Hamilton appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation and excessive force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Kaplan v. City of N. Las Vegas, 323 F.3d 1226, 1229 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Hamilton’s retaliation claim. Hamilton failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant White was aware of Hamilton’s grievance before White transferred Hamilton to another cell. See Rhodes v. Robinson, 408 F.3d 559, 567-68 (9th Cir.2005) (elements of a § 1983 retaliation claim in the prison context).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Hamilton’s excessive force claim against defendants Milson, Morelli and Thomas. Those defendants did not use force against Hamilton, and Hamilton has presented no facts from which it can reasonably be inferred that they caused or should have foreseen the use of pepper spray on Hamilton. Thus, Hamilton failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether these defendants…