Marc Endsley v. Octavio Luna
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Marc Anthony Lowell Endsley, who is committed to a state psychiatric hospital facility, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising from his former hospital’s treatment program and its requirement that patients remain in a common room if they choose not to participate in treatment sessions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Doe 1 v. Abbott Labs., 571 F.3d 930, 933 (9th Cir.2009), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Endsley’s inadequate mental health treatment claim arising from the revocation of some of his privileges because he failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether this decision by his treatment team was “a substantial departure from accepted professional judgment, practice, or standards.” Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307, 323 , 102 S.Ct. 2452 , 73 L.Ed.2d 28 (1982) (decisions by mental healthcare professionals are “presumptively valid”).
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Endsley’s excessive force claim because he failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the force used was…