DocketNumber: 09-35530
Judges: O'Scannlain, Leavy, Tallman
Filed Date: 11/2/2010
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/5/2024
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 02 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT TIMOTHY RAY PATRICK, No. 09-35530 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 6:08-CV-00275-AA v. MEMORANDUM * GREG MARTIN, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Ann Aiken, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted October 19, 2010 ** Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. Timothy Ray Patrick, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his42 U.S.C. § 1983
action alleging violations of his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under28 U.S.C. § 1291
. We review de novo, Galen v. County of Los Angeles,477 F.3d 652
, 658 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). (9th Cir. 2007) (summary judgment based on qualified immunity); Barren v. Harrington,152 F.3d 1193
, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under28 U.S.C. § 1915
(e)), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds on the deliberate indifference claim because Patrick failed to raise a triable issue as to whether defendant, a correctional officer, informed other inmates that Patrick was a snitch or sent an inmate to attack Patrick. See Farmer v. Brennan,511 U.S. 825
, 834-37 (1994) (discussing deliberate indifference standard); Rodriguez v. Maricopa County Cmty. College Dist.,605 F.3d 703
, 711 (9th Cir. 2010) (a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if there is no constitutional violation); see also Nilsson v. City of Mesa,503 F.3d 947
, 952 n.2 (9th Cir. 2007) (a conclusory affidavit unsupported by facts is insufficient to raise a triable issue). The district court properly dismissed the sexual harassment claim based on defendant’s comments to Patrick, because verbal harassment is insufficient to state a section 1983 claim. See Oltarzewski v. Ruggiero,830 F.2d 136
, 139 (9th Cir. 1987). Patrick’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 2 09-35530
Donald Robin BARREN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tom HARRINGTON,... ( 1998 )
Charles J. Oltarzewski, Jr. v. Marcia Ruggiero ( 1987 )
Nilsson v. City of Mesa ( 2007 )
Rodriguez v. MARICOPA CTY. COMMUNITY COLLEGE DIST. ( 2010 )
jeffrey-m-galen-v-county-of-los-angeles-los-angeles-county-sheriffs ( 2007 )