[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 12

- 12915 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 9:11

- cv - 80122

- WPD
YAQUB JAMEEL FAHEEM,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff

- Appellant,

versus ARMOR CORRECTIONAL HEALTH, INC., et al.,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendants, NINA GAMINARA, individually,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defend ant

- Appellee.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

________________________ (December 28, 2012) Before PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 12-12915 Date Filed: 12/28/2012 Page: 1 of 42 Yaqub Faheem, a Florida prisoner , appe als pro se the summary judgment against his complaint t hat Nina Gaminara , a nurse at the Palm Beach County Detention Center, violated his civil rights as a pretrial detainee under the
Fourteen th Amendment

. 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Faheem a rgu e s that Gaminara ac ted with deliberate indifferen ce to his serious medical needs b y forging his signature to obtain his medical records instead of having him transported for a n appointment he had scheduled with a s p ecialist to treat his Hepatitis C and by prescribing medication to treat his elevated triglycerides and cholesterol that Gaminara knew or should have known would exacerbate liver d amage . We affirm. We review a summary judgment de novo , and we consider the facts and draw reasonable inferences fro m those facts in the light most favorable to the non

movant. Bozeman v. Orum , 422 F.3d 1265, 1267 (11th Cir. 2005). Summary judgment is appropriate “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled t o judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). “[G] enuine disputes of facts are those in which the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non

- movant. For factual issues to be considered genuine, they must have a r eal basis in the record.” Mann v. Taser Intern., Inc. , 588 F.3d 1291, 1303 (11 th Cir

. 2009) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Case: 12-12915 Date Filed: 12/28/2012 Page: 2 of 43 The district court did not err when it entered summary judgment against Faheem’s complaint

. Nurse Gaminara treated Faheem , who had a history of Hepatitis C , but “slightly” elevated liver enzymes, by ordering blood work to assess his liver and high cholesterol , regulating his diet and later prescribing Lopid to control his c holesterol , and ordering blood tests to monitor his li ver. Faheem argues that Gaminara obtained his medical records to avoid sending him to a

s p ecialist , but Faheem fails to e xplain how his condition required the attention of a specialist. The affidavit of Dr. Chad Zawitz, a physician and medical expert,

es tablished that Gaminara a d hered t o the standard of care in her treatment of Faheem, includ ing prescribing him Lopid. Faheem speculates that he had advanced liver disease and Lopid caused him increased knee pain and skin disorders, but t est results and Dr. Zawitz’s affidavit established that Faheem exhibited none of the ailments ordinarily associated with advanced liver disease and th e disease could not have been caused by administering Lopid to him

. Faheem complained that Gaminara should have treated his Hepatitis C with the medication Interferon, but Dr. Zawitz averred that Interferon was contraindicated for inmates like Faheem who would not be detained long enough to complete the
treatment. Even if we were to conclude that Gaminara was negligent in trea ting Faheem, negligence is not sufficient to establish deliberate indifference. See
Farrow v. West , 320 F.3d 1235, 1245 (11th Cir. 2003)

.

Case: 12-12915 Date Filed: 12/28/2012 Page: 3 of 44 We AFFIRM the summary judgment in favor of Gaminara. Case: 12-12915 Date Filed: 12/28/2012 Page: 4 of 4