Domingo Montar-Morales v. BISSON, Officer, Monroe Correctional Complex

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DOMINGO MONTAR-MORALES,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
BISSON, Officer, Monroe Correctional
Complex,
Defendant-Appellee,
and
JOHN P. PICKERING, Officer, Monroe
Correctional Complex; et al.,
Defendants.
No. 22-35591
D.C. No. 2:20-cv-00776-TSZ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Thomas S. Zilly, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2023**
Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
* 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
JUL 12 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-35591
Washington state prisoner Domingo Montar-Morales appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a
failure-to protect claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
de novo. Cortez v. Skol, 776 F.3d 1046, 1050 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendant Bisson
because Montar-Morales failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to
whether Bisson was deliberately indifferent to an excessive risk to Montar-
Morales’s safety. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994) (a prison
official is deliberately indifferent only if the prison 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 --