FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 22 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DONALD WILLIAMS, No. 11-15384
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:09-cv-03067-GGH
v.
MEMORANDUM *
M. S. EVANS, Warden; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Gregory G. Hollows, Magistrate Judge, Presiding **
Submitted May 15, 2012 ***
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Donald Williams, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(c).
***
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
officials violated the Eighth Amendment by failing to provide him with safe
showering facilities. 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 Williams
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants acted
with deliberate indifference regarding shower safety and the provision of shower
mats. See id. at 1058 (prison officials act with deliberate indifference only if they
know of and disregard an excessive risk to inmate health and safety); id. at 1060
(“Deliberate indifference is a high legal standard.”).
Williams’ remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 11-15384