Robert Wayne Ahn v. Benjamin Griego, incorrectly named as Ben Gregio;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ROBERT WAYNE AHN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BENJAMIN GRIEGO, incorrectly named
as Ben Gregio; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 11-16601
D.C. No. 2:09-cv-01672-PGR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Paul G. Rosenblatt, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Robert Wayne Ahn, an Hawaii state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
that prison officials acted with deliberate indifference to his safety in violation of
FILED
JUL 12 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-16601 2
the Eighth Amendment. 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.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Ahn’s claim that
defendants were deliberately indifferent to his safety, because Ahn 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 found liable [for deliberate indifference] . . . unless the
official knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or safety”). To
the extent that Ahn alleges that defendant Poehlman used excessive force against
him, the district court properly granted summary judgment because Ahn failed to
raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the alleged force was applied
maliciously or sadistically to cause harm. See Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 7
(1992) (explaining that “the core judicial inquiry is . . . whether force was applied
in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline, or maliciously and
sadistically to cause harm”).
We do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v.
Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --