Miller v. Gardner

103 F.3d 139 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Samuel W. MILLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard G. GARDNER; Larry Laird; Victor Vandermy; Billy Peace; B. Paine; D.S. Shoemaker; Paul Delaplane; Larry Wright; Dan Mahoney; Charles Steuart; Steve Stedfeld; Samuel Stratfield, Defendants-Appellees. No. 96-35399. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 5, 1996. * Decided Nov. 7, 1996. Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Idaho state prisoner Samuel W. Miller appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Kruso v. International Tel. & Tel. Corp., 872 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1989). We vacate and remand. 3 Before entering summary judgment, "[d]istrict courts are obligated to advise prisoner pro per litigants of Rule 56 requirements." Klingele v. Eikenberry,…