Mario A. Williams v. Alvaro C. Traquina;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIO A. WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ALVARO C. TRAQUINA; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 14-16188
D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01687-LKK-AC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence K. Karlton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 10, 2015**
Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Mario A. Williams, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an
Eighth Amendment violation in connection with the treatment of his right hand.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v.
FILED
MAR 20 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants
because Williams failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether
defendants knew of and consciously disregarded a substantial risk to his health.
See id. at 1057 (prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they know
of and disregard a “substantial risk of serious harm” to prisoner); see also Starr v.
Baca, 652 F.3d 1202, 1207-08 (9th Cir. 2011) (requirements for establishing
supervisory liability); Cafasso, U.S. ex rel. v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc., 637
F.3d 1047, 1061 (9th Cir. 2011) (“To survive summary judgment, a plaintiff must
set forth non-speculative evidence of specific facts, not sweeping conclusory
allegations.”).
AFFIRMED.
14-16188 2

-- 2 of 2 --