Gray

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSE N. BETETA, No. 2:22-cv-0037 DAD CKD P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DR. GRAY, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 22, 2022, the court screened plaintiff’s amended complaint as the court is required to do under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court found that plaintiff could proceed on a claim arising under the Eighth Amendment against defendant Dr. Gray. Defendant Gray moves for summary judgment. I. Summary Judgment Standard Summary judgment is appropriate when it is demonstrated that there “is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). A party asserting that a fact cannot be disputed must support the assertion by “citing to particular parts of materials in the record, including depositions, documents, 27 …