Nelson v. California Department of Corrections

MEMORANDUM **

Stephen Nelson, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in his action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc), and its grant of a motion to dismiss, Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc., 143 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

It is undisputed that Nelson should not have had to wait thirteen months to receive the pulmonary function test a prison doctor prescribed for him. But the district court properly granted summary judgment on Nelson’s claims against medical appeals coordinator Deborah Ruisi because Nelson failed to raise a genuine issue of fact as to whether Ruisi intentionally or purposefully interfered with or delayed Nelson’s medical care. See McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059-61 (9th Cir.1992), overruled on other grounds by WMX Technologies, Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir.1997).

The district court properly found that defendants Nunez and Melching were entitled…