FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 28 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAMES DAVID KARNATH, No. 12-35089
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01002-RSM
v.
MEMORANDUM*
TRACY DANIELS,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ricardo S. Martinez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 21, 2014**
Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Washington state prisoner James David Karnath appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
*
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).
excessive force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de
novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Karnath
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant
maliciously and sadistically used force against him for the very purpose of causing
him harm while escorting him to protective custody against his wishes. See
Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 319-21 (1986) (setting forth elements of excessive
force claim).
We do not address issued raised by Karnath for the first time on appeal
regarding alleged repeated injuries to his hands and wrists from the use of
restraints and unspecified unconstitutional conditions of confinement and torture.
See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).
Karnath’s contentions regarding unanswered admissions that allegedly
resulted in defendant “defaulting the case to Plaintiff,” and “papers on sovereignty”
which go to “the issue of Jurisdiction,” are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 12-35089