Paul Klein v. Dr. Scott

Good Law
481 F. App'x 347
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 21, 201211-17397California465 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Paul Scott Klein, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs with respect to his back injury and pain. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We review for an abuse of discretion a decision to dismiss a complaint without leave to amend. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed Klein’s deliberate indifference claims against defendants Palmer, Bannister, Kirkpatrick, Fisher, Rabbi, and the John and Jane Doe corrections officers because Klein failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants knew of and disregarded an excessive risk of harm to his health. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (“[A] prison official cannot be found liable under the Eighth Amendment for denying an inmate humane conditions of confinement unless the official knows of and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.