Gordon Dale Meador v. Ralph Diaz;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GORDON DALE MEADOR,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
RALPH DIAZ; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-16760
D.C. No. 4:19-cv-02116-JSW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Jeffrey S. White, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 14, 2021**
Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Gordon Dale Meador appeals pro se from the district court’s summary
judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his
safety. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.
Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004). 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).
FILED
SEP 22 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-16760
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Meador
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants knew of
and disregarded an excessive risk to his safety. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S.
825, 837 (1994) (a prison official cannot be held liable for deliberate indifference
“unless the official knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or
safety; the official must both be aware of facts from which the inference could be
drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, and he must also draw the
inference”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --