Timothy Ray Patrick v. Greg Martin

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
TIMOTHY RAY PATRICK,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
GREG MARTIN,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 09-35530
D.C. No. 6:08-CV-00275-AA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Ann Aiken, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Timothy Ray Patrick, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo, Galen v. County of Los Angeles, 477 F.3d 652, 658
FILED
NOV 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-35530 2
(9th Cir. 2007) (summary judgment based on qualified immunity); Barren v.
Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on qualified
immunity grounds on the deliberate indifference claim because Patrick failed to
raise a triable issue as to whether defendant, a correctional officer, informed other
inmates that Patrick was a snitch or sent an inmate to attack Patrick. See Farmer v.
Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834-37 (1994) (discussing deliberate indifference
standard); Rodriguez v. Maricopa County Cmty. College Dist., 605 F.3d 703, 711
(9th Cir. 2010) (a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity if there is no
constitutional violation); see also Nilsson v. City of Mesa, 503 F.3d 947, 952 n.2
(9th Cir. 2007) (a conclusory affidavit unsupported by facts is insufficient to raise
a triable issue).
The district court properly dismissed the sexual harassment claim based on
defendant’s comments to Patrick, because verbal harassment is insufficient to state
a section 1983 claim. See Oltarzewski v. Ruggiero, 830 F.2d 136, 139 (9th Cir.
1987).
Patrick’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --