Robert Fort v. A. Mauney

MEMORANDUM

Oregon state prisoner Robert Earl Fort appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment violations arising from an altercation with another inmate. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1044 (9th Cir.1989), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Fort’s Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim against Mau-ney because Fort failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Mauney knew that the other inmate posed a substantial risk of serious harm to Fort. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 887 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (“[T]he official must both be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, and he must also draw the inference.”).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Fort’s Eighth Amendment failuie-to-train claim because Fort failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants were personally involved in the incident, whether they were aware their training program was…