David Lerickson v. Sargeant Lopez

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DAVID L ERICKSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SARGEANT LOPEZ,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 12-35506
D.C. No. 3:11-cv-05982-RJB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert J. Bryan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 16, 2013**
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Washington state prisoner David L. Erickson appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging First and Eighth
Amendment violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
FILED
APR 23 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-35506 2
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Erickson’s claim
that defendant failed to protect him from inmate assault because Erickson failed to
raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant knew of and
disregarded an excessive risk to Erickson’s safety. See id. at 1056-57 (a prison
official is deliberately indifferent only if he knows of and disregards an excessive
risk to an inmate’s 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 --