Randal N. Wiideman v. James Potter, Individually

8 F.3d 34 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. RANDAL N. WIIDEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JAMES POTTER, Individually, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-15649. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 20, 1993. * Decided Sept. 29, 1993. Before: FLETCHER, POOLE, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Randal N. Wiideman, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment against him in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action. The district court determined that defendant Potter, a prison doctor, did not show deliberate indifference to Wiideman's serious medical needs. The district court further determined that Wiideman did not proffer sufficient evidence to show that he was transferred to a different prison in retaliation for filing a lawsuit against Potter. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and review de novo. Hopkins v. Andaya, 958 F.2d 881, 884 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam). We…