FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 27 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOE RAUL HERNANDEZ, No. 11-55831
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:08-cv-07607-VAP-
FFM
v.
OFFICER SERRANO, MEMORANDUM *
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 13, 2012 **
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Joe Raul Hernandez appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Arpin v. Santa
*
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).
Clara Valley Transp. Agency, 261 F.3d 912, 919 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Officer
Serrano because Hernandez failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to
whether Officer Serrano’s use of a K-9 dog to effectuate Hernandez’s arrest was
objectively reasonable under the circumstances. See Long v. City & County of
Honolulu, 511 F.3d 901, 905 (9th Cir. 2007) (“In a Fourth Amendment excessive
force case, defendants can still win on summary judgment if the district court
concludes, after resolving all factual disputes in favor of the plaintiff, that the
officer’s use of force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances.”
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
AFFIRMED.
2 11-55831