Aragon v. Hinkle ( 1998 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-10909
Summary Calendar
JERRY ARAGON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
THOMAS HINKLE; SANTOS GARCIA; TONY ASH;
MELISSA L. ARESKOG; LONA CHEAIRS; CRAIG A. RAINES,
Defendants,
TONY ASH,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:96-CV-36
- - - - - - - - - -
April 7, 1998
Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jerry Aragon (#376237), a state prisoner, appeals the
magistrate judge’s orders granting the motion for summary
judgment of defendant prison guard Tony Ash, COIII and denying
Aragon’s motion to compel responses to his discovery request.
Aragon has failed to present evidence showing a genuine issue of
whether Ash was subjectively aware of facts from which an
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 97-10909
-2-
inference could be drawn that there was a risk that Aragon would
be assaulted by another inmate or whether Ash actually drew such
an inference. See Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 533 (5th Cir.
1995). Aragon has not shown substantial prejudice from the
magistrate judge’s refusal to compel discovery responses. See
Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and
Coordination Unit, 28 F.3d 1388, 1394 (5th Cir. 1994). Aragon
argues that he was misled by the magistrate judge’s order of June
30, 1997. Any error resulting from the magistrate judge’s
statement was harmless since Aragon had ample time to defend
against Ash’s motion for summary judgment.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.