[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
MAY 24, 2007
No. 07-10034 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 06-00007-CV-J-33MCR
SYLVESTER LEWIS BROWN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
R. MACHE, in his individual capacity,
OFFICER HARDEE, in his individual capacity,
STEVE SINGER, in his official capacity,
Defendants-Appellees,
OFFICER J. M. GOLUM, in his individual capacity,
Defendant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
_________________________
(May 24, 2007)
Before BARKETT, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Sylvester Brown (“Brown”), a Florida state prisoner proceeding pro se,
appeals the district court’s grant of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment
with respect to his action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”). Brown
essentially alleged that prison officials retaliated against him for filing grievances
by changing his work assignment, and that they were deliberately indifferent to his
lupus condition.
However, Brown has failed to establish any causal relationship between his
grievances and the job reassignment. Although Brown did engage in protected
conduct by filing his grievances, Brown provides no facts indicating that the
reassignment was retaliatory. His claims are conclusory in that they fail to allege
any causal link between his grievances and the defendants’ decision regarding his
work schedule. Accordingly, his claims are insufficient to overcome the
defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Moreover, to state a First Amendment
claim for retaliation, a prisoner must allege that he was penalized for exercising the
right of free speech. Brown has not adequately indicated that any job reassignment
could be considered a penalty.
Brown also argues that defendants treated him with deliberate indifference
2
to a serious medical need in violation of the Eighth Amendment, by reassigning
him to a job that exacerbated his lupus condition. However, here again, Brown has
failed to show any evidence rebutting the affidavits presented on summary
judgment, which indicate that Brown did not have an objectively serious medical
need.1
AFFIRMED.
1
Dr. Gonzalez treated Brown and he found no serious medical need. Dr. Gonzalez stated
that Brown had no symptoms of distress and his vital signs were normal. He further stated that
Brown did not show any signs of suffering from a lupus episode. Dr. Daniel Cherry, III, the
Director of Health Services for the Florida Department of Corrections, stated that there was no
objective evidence in Brown’s medical records that he was suffering from a lupus episode during
the relevant time period.
3