Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-04155/USCOURTS-ca8-05-04155-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-4155

___________

Byron Dawes, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Cole Jeter, Warden, in his individual *

and official capacity as Ex-Warden *

at the Federal Correctional * [UNPUBLISHED]

Complex-Low (FCCL-FC) at *

Forrest City, Arkansas; Jose Jimenez, *

in his individual capacity as Health *

Services Administrator at FCCL-FC; *

Edna Prince, in her official and *

individual capacity as Chief Medical *

Officer FCCL-FC; Y Toro, in her *

individual capacity as Physician *

Assistant at FCCL-FC; E. Kineish, *

in his individual and official capacity *

as Doctor at FCCL-FC; G. Toliver, *

in his individual capacity as R. N. at *

FCCL-FC; E. Taylor, in her individual *

capacity as R. N. at FCCL-FC; Linda *

Sanders, Warden, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: December 7, 2006

Filed: December 21, 2006

___________

Appellate Case: 05-4155 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/21/2006 Entry ID: 3261521
1

The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Jerry

W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

2

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S.

388 (1971).

-2-

Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Byron Dawes appeals the district court’s1

 adverse grant of

summary judgment in his Bivens2

 action. We agree with the district court that there

is nothing in the record to support Dawes’s opinion that the medical care he has

received is so inadequate as to amount to a constitutional violation. See Jolly v.

Knudsen, 205 F.3d 1094, 1096 (8th Cir. 2000) (mere disagreement with course of

medical treatment is insufficient to state Eighth Amendment claim); Dulany v.

Carnahan, 132 F.3d 1234, 1240 (8th Cir. 1997) (where medical records indicate

treatment was provided and physician affidavits indicate care was adequate, inmate

cannot create fact question merely by stating he did not believe treatment was

adequate).

Accordingly, we affirm, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, but we modify the district court’s

order to clarify that the dismissal does not count as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-4155 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/21/2006 Entry ID: 3261521