William H. Seiwell, III v. Samuel A. Lewis

29 F.3d 634 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William H. SEIWELL, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Samuel A. LEWIS, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-17282. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 21, 1994. * Decided July 6, 1994. Before: TANG, PREGERSON, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 William Seiwell, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of the defendant prison officials in his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 civil rights action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and review de novo. Hopkins v. Andaya, 958 F.2d 881, 884 (9th Cir.1992). We affirm. 3 Seiwell contends that prison dental practitioners subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. This contention lacks merit. 4 A grant of summary judgment should be affirmed only if the evidence, read in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, demonstrates that there…