Court Opinion

ID: 9384504
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-04 00:00:35.678703+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:53.902844
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40047       Document: 00516698711             Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/03/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                                     United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit

                                                                                    FILED
                                     No. 22-40047                                April 3, 2023
                                   Summary Calendar                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                    Clerk

   Clifford C. Cook,

                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                           versus

   Michael B. Crow, Assistant Warden; Jeffrey R.
   Woodard; Vivian Davis; Clemente Espinoza; Rochelle P.
   Rogers,

                                                                Defendants—Appellees.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Eastern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 1:20-CV-85

   Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Appellant Clifford Cook is an inmate in the custody of the Texas
   Department of Criminal Justice. He brought this pro se Section 1983 action
   after he was assaulted by four members of the Crips gang. He alleges various

          *
              Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
   should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set
   forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-40047      Document: 00516698711           Page: 2    Date Filed: 04/03/2023

                                     No. 22-40047

   officials at the Mark W. Stiles Unit were deliberately indifferent to his safety
   in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
          The district court granted summary judgment for Defendants and
   dismissed Cook’s claims. On appeal, Cook contends Defendants knew he
   was vulnerable to assault because he was in safekeeping status due to threats
   from the Aryan Circle gang during an unrelated 2008 prison stint, and he
   communicated his fears to Defendants multiple times leading up to the
   assault challenged here. He also seeks an injunction requiring Defendants to
   provide him safekeeping status and faults the district court for failing to
   address his claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”).
          The record contains no evidence that Defendants were “aware of
   facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of
   serious harm” to Cook was posed by Crips members, or that Defendants
   actually drew such an inference. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837,
   114 S. Ct. 1970, 1979 (1994). Cook’s claim for injunctive relief was rendered
   moot upon his transfer to a different unit. See, e.g., Cooper v. Sheriff, Lubbock
   Cnty., 929 F.2d 1078, 1084 (5th Cir. 1991). And to the extent Cook ever
   alleged an IIED claim, he abandoned it when he failed to address it in
   response to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. See Keelan v.
   Majesco Software, Inc., 407 F.3d 332, 339–40 (5th Cir. 2005).
          For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s judgment is
   AFFIRMED.
          Cook’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED AS MOOT.

                                          2