Case Name: Robert LANDRUM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of WASHINGTON; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-19
Citations: 177 F. App'x 661
Docket Number: No. 03-35675
Parties: Robert LANDRUM, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of WASHINGTON; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 661–661

Head Matter:
Robert LANDRUM, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of WASHINGTON; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
No. 03-35675.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 13, 2006.
Filed April 19, 2006.
Robert Landrum, WSPW—Washington State Penitentiary, Walla Walla, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Timothy M. Durkin, Esq., Spokane County Prosecuting, Spokane, WA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: SILVERMAN, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Robert Landrum, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his Eighth Amendment rights were violated when he was subjected to excessive force at the Spokane County Jail. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. After de novo review, Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 900 (9th Cir.2001), we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Landrum's Eighth Amendment claim because Landrum failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants applied force "maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm," rather than in a good-faith effort to restore discipline after Landrum refused to comply with orders to submit to standard handcuffing procedure. See Clement v. Gomez, 298 F.3d 898, 903-04 (9th Cir.2002); see also Jeffers v. Gomez, 267 F.3d 895, 907 (9th Cir.2001) (per curiam) (to survive summary judgment, plaintiff must put forward specific, nonconclusory factual allegations that establish defendants acted with improper motive).
Landrum's remaining contentions lack merit.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.