Opinion

Melvin Munir v. Thomas

  • 471 F. App'x 570
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Filed
Mar 6, 2012
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Fernandez, McKeown, Bybee
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 20.1%

The opinion

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 06 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MELVIN MUNIR, No. 09-15727

Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:05-cv-01996-MCE-

EFB

v.

THOMAS, Sergeant, MEMORANDUM *

Defendant - Appellant,

and

MARTINEZ, Correctional Officer; et al.,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 21, 2012 **

Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Thomas, a housing sergeant at California Medical Facility, appeals from the

*

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).

district court’s order denying him qualified immunity in plaintiff’ Munir’s 42

U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. We

dismiss for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

We lack jurisdiction to consider this interlocutory appeal because “an order

denying qualified immunity on the ground that a genuine issue of material fact

exists is not a final, immediately appealable order.” Maropulos v. County of Los

Angeles, 560 F.3d 974, 975 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam), citing Johnson v. Jones,

515 U.S. 304, 314-15 (1995). The district court denied qualified immunity to

Thomas after determining that there were genuine disputes of material fact as to

whether Thomas was deliberately indifferent to Munir’s medical needs, and that

those facts, if proven, would establish a violation of Munir’s clearly established

Eighth Amendment rights. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of

jurisdiction.

DISMISSED.

2 09-15727

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.