Anthony Wayne Oliver v. James Gomez, Director of Corrections California State Prison K.W. Prunty, Warden Bobbie L. Reed, ph.d. Jacqueline Clarke P.D. Washington

Check Treatment

Related Cases

Ramon Cano v. R. Jouler, Correctional Officer A. Bell, Program Services Manager D. Northealt, Assistant Supervisor G.W. Balwin, Superintendent D. Binschus, Correctional Officer
Michael A. Christopher v. James Gomez, Director, California Department of Corrections L. Snider, Warden, California Correctional Institute Alipaz, Correctional Officer Saladna, Correctional Officer Howard, Correctional Officer Sneed, Correctional Officer Gamboa, Correctional Officer Gatti, Correctional Officer Yoder, Correctional Officer Gonzalez, Correctional Officer
Christina Jay Acker Pamela Newman v. Judy Frigo, Deputy Warden, in Her Individual and Official Capacities Elijio Lopez, Internal Investigations, Individual and Official Capacities Harry Sombrero, Investigator, Individual and Official Capacities Cso Bridgewater, Individual and Official Capacities Sgt Hooten, Individual and Official Capacity Lt. Whitman, in Individual and Official Capacities Frank Nitterhauser, Cso, Individual and Official Capacities Samuel Lewis, Director Adoc, Individual and Official Capacities Barbara Daniels, Cps, Individual and Official Capacities Dale Copeland, Warden, Individual and Official Capacities Jerry Eitniear, Cpo, Individual and Official Capacities Terry Klukey, Recreational Supervisor, Individual and Official Capacities John Hayes, Administrative Assistant, Individual and Official Capacities Thomas McDonald Legal Analyst, Individual and Official Capacities Christine Derrington Mould, Inmate 84630, Individual and Official Capacities Anna Reyes, Inmate, Individual and Official Capacities Judy Richwine, Internal Investigations, Individual and Official Capacities
Charles B. Bruce, III v. California Department of Corrections James Rowland, Director, Department of Corrections Otis Thurman, Warden, California Institution for Men Robert Bales, Assoc. Warden
Charles Queen v. J. Gomez, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Director of the Department of Correction K.W. Prunty, Warden, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Warden of Calipatria State Prison Washington, Program Admin, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Program Administrator at Calipatria State Prison P. Tingey, Program Admin, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Program Administrator at Calipatria Prison C. Dominguez, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Program Administrator at Calipatria State Prison Nelson, Correction Officer, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a Correction Officer Huddleston, Correctional Officer, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as a Correctional Officer for the Department of Correction Does, Does One Through X-100

92 F.3d 1193

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Anthony Wayne OLIVER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
James GOMEZ, Director of Corrections California State
Prison; K.W. Prunty, Warden; Bobbie L. Reed,
Ph.D.; Jacqueline Clarke; P.D.
Washington, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-55590.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 29, 1996.*
Decided Aug. 5, 1996.

Before: HUG, Chief Judge, SCHROEDER and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

1

MEMORANDUM**

2

Anthony Wayne Oliver, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendant prison officials in Oliver's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. After a de novo review of the record, see Jesinger v. Nevada Fed. Credit Union, 24 F.3d 1127, 1130 (9th Cir.1994), we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court's order filed April 3, 1995.

AFFIRMED.1

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

1

Because of our disposition of this appeal, we do not consider the applicability, if any, of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub.L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996), to this appeal