Kenneth Law v. E.K. McDANIEL, Warden;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
KENNETH LAW,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
E.K. McDANIEL, Warden; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 09-17686
D.C. No. 07-cv-00262-ECR-VPC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Edward C. Reed, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Kenneth Law, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison
officials were deliberately indifferent to his safety. We have jurisdiction under 28
FILED
FEB 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-17686 2
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 626 (9th Cir.
2002), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Law failed to
raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants had a culpable state
of mind when approving requests for a copy of a book containing information that
posed a risk to Law’s safety, or allowing the book into the prison facility. 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 . . . safety.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --