Mack v. Vincent, et al

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.
47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-21114
Conference Calendar
JOE HENRY MACK,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DR. B.M. VINCENT; F.E. FIGUEROA; M. BROCK;
L. ARNOLD; DR. KOVACS,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CV-2548
- - - - - - - - - -
August 23, 2001
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Joe Henry Mack, Texas prisoner # 671331, appeals the
district court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of the
defendants in his civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. We review the grant of summary judgment de novo under
the same standards applied in the district court. Amburgey v.
Corhart Refractories Corp., 936 F.2d 805, 809 (5th Cir. 1991).
Summary judgment is proper when, viewing the evidence in the
light most favorable to the nonmovant, “‘there is no genuine
issue as to any material fact and . . . the moving party is

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-21114
- 2 -
entitled to judgment as a matter of law.’” Id. (quoting Fed.
R. Civ. P. 56(c)).
Mack has failed to shown a genuine issue for trial that the
prison staff was deliberately indifferent to his medical
condition. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 847 (1994).
Similarly, Mack has failed to show a genuine issue for trial that
prison officials subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment
because of his cell or work assignments. See Wilson v. Seiter,
501 U.S. 294, 303 (1991). The district court did not err in
granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --