Jones-Heim

Jones-Heim v. Reed

Good Law
241 F. App'x 359
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 2007No. 05-15338California1,041 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiff Dyan Jones-Heim appeals the district court’s decision granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. We review de novo the district court’s order granting summary judgment. See Long v. County of Los Angeles, 442 F.3d 1178, 1184-85 (9th Cir.2006). We apply the same standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) as the district court did. See Qwest Commc’ns, Inc. v. Berkeley, 433 F.3d 1253 , 1256 (9th Cir.2006). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

After a brief furlough, Plaintiff, a prisoner at the Federal Corrections Institution, was asked to provide a urine sample when she returned to prison. The sample was tested by the National Toxicology Laboratories (“NTL”), using an Enzyme Multiple Immunoassay Test (“EMIT”). The sample tested positive for amphetamines-methamphetamine. The positive result was confirmed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (“GC/MS”). At a disciplinary hearing, Plaintiff presented a letter from a drug manufacturer that stated that it was a “common occurrence” for Midrin, a pain reliever that Plaintiff had been prescribed by a prison doctor, to give a false-positive result for amphetamines. After…

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.