Lacey Mark Sivak v. Kelly Mutch, Dr. R. Frosheisar Charles Steuart, Dr.

67 F.3d 308 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Lacey Mark SIVAK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kelly MUTCH, Dr.; R. Frosheisar; Charles Steuart, Dr.; et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-36014. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 11, 1995. * Decided Sept. 25, 1995. 1 Before: BEEZER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges, and TEVRIZIAN, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Lacey Sivak appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of all defendants in Sivak's civil rights suit. Our jurisdiction is under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We affirm. I. 4 Sivak was attacked and beaten by another inmate in the Ada County jail. He sued Doctors Mutch and Steuart ("the Doctors"), alleging that they failed to treat adequately the injuries he sustained and ignored his other medical problems. The district court, applying the standards enunciated in Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 103-05 (1976), determined that Sivak failed to present sufficient…