Court Opinion

ID: 9894933
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-03 17:00:55.616985+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:01.576597
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        NOV 3 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JERRY E. JOHNSON,                               No.    22-15567

                Plaintiff-Appellant,            D.C. No.
                                                2:18-cv-02427-RFB-VCF
 v.

MOORE, Ms.; et al.,                             MEMORANDUM*

                Defendants-Appellees.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Nevada
                 Richard F. Boulware II, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted November 3, 2023**

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, FERNANDEZ, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

      Nevada state prisoner Jerry E. Johnson appeals pro se from the district

court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Eighth

Amendment violations arising from unsanitary conditions of confinement. We

affirm.

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
      The district court properly granted summary judgment because Johnson

failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the prison staff

consciously disregarded an excessive risk to Johnson’s health by exposing him

to unsanitary conditions when he was placed temporarily in an unclean cell for

several hours during the transfer of a group of inmates to different cell placements

within the prison. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056-58 (9th Cir.

2004) (prison officials are deliberately indifferent only if they know of and

disregard an excessive risk of serious harm to inmate health); Anderson v. County

of Kern, 45 F.3d 1310, 1314-15 (9th Cir. 1995) (lack of sanitation must be severe

and prolonged to constitute an Eighth Amendment violation).

      AFFIRMED.

                                           2