Manse Sullivan v. T. Ryan

MEMORANDUM

Manse Sullivan appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations while he was confined in Santa Clara County Jail awaiting civil commitment proceedings pursuant to California’s Sexually Violent Predator Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 926 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Sullivan’s claim against defendant Connor because Sullivan failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether his confinement in administrative segregated housing served legitimate, non-punitive governmental interests. See id. at 932 (analyzing conditions of eon-finement for civil detainees under the Fourteenth Amendment and stating that civil detainees may be subject to “[ljegiti-mate, non-punitive government interests” such as “maintaining jail security, and effective- management of [the] detention facility”). .

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Sullivan’s claim against defendants Burden and Tarabetz for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs because…