Alven Spitzer v. California Dept. Of Corrections

46 F.3d 1145 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Alven SPITZER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-15608. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 19, 1994. * Decided Jan. 11, 1995. Before: SNEED, D.W. NELSON, and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Alven Spitzer, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendant J.W. Keller, a prison medical assistant, in Spitzer's 42 U.S.C. action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Spitzer also appeals the district court's denial of his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and affirm. 3 * Summary Judgment 4 We review the district court's summary judgment de novo. McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059 (9th Cir.1992). A grant of summary judgment should be affirmed only if the…