ISIAH LUCAS, Jr. v. M. MIRANDA, Sergeant;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ISIAH LUCAS, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
M. MIRANDA, Sergeant; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 12-15661
D.C. No. 4:07-cv-01673-CW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Claudia Wilken, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 14, 2013**
Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Former California state prisoner Isiah Lucas, Jr., appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
deliberate indifference in connection with his upper bunk assignment. We have
FILED
MAY 21 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-15661 2
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Garcia v. County of
Merced, 639 F.3d 1206, 1208 (9th Cir. 2011), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on the basis of
qualified immunity because it would not have been clear to reasonable prison
officials in defendants’ position that following prison housing protocols
prioritizing epileptic inmates for lower bunks would amount to deliberate
indifference. See Norwood v. Vance, 591 F.3d 1062, 1068 (9th Cir. 2010) (“The
relevant, dispositive inquiry . . . is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer
that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.” (emphasis, citation
and internal quotation marks omitted)).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --