The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
15-35225•Timothy Allan Dunlap v. Dennis Frick
15-35225Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJun 23, 2016
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TIMOTHY ALLAN DUNLAP,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DENNIS FRICK,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 15-35225
D.C. No. 1:13-cv-00299-CWD
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
Candy W. Dale, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**
Submitted June 14, 2016***
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Idaho state prisoner Timothy Allan Dunlap appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendant
FILED
JUN 23 2016
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 parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(c).
*** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument and denies Dunlap’s requests for oral argument, set forth in
his opening brief and in separate motions. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
-- 1 of 2 --
deprived him of food in violation of 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 because Dunlap
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether being provided two
meals on weekend days constituted a sufficiently serious deprivation under the
Eighth Amendment. See Foster v. Runnels, 554 F.3d 807, 812, 814 (9th Cir. 2009)
(two-part showing required to establish a violation of the Eighth Amendment,
including an objective showing that there was a sufficiently serious deprivation of
the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities); LeMaire v. Maass, 12 F.3d
1444, 1456 (9th Cir. 1993) (“The Eighth Amendment requires only that prisoners
receive food that is adequate to maintain health.”).
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.
15-35225 2
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.