Unpublished Disposition, 845 F.2d 329 (9th Cir. 1988)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Richard L. Alley, a prisoner at San Quentin State Prison, brought a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1982) against two correctional officers, alleging that they were spreading rumors which endangered his life. The district court granted summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) to the defendants. Alley appeals and argues that the district court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing to further inquire into statements by Officer Avila, a third correctional officer.

We review de novo a grant of summary judgment, and apply the same standard as the district court. Berg v. Kincheloe, 794 F.2d 457, 459 (9th Cir. 1986). Summary judgment is appropriate if, viewing the evidence and the pleadings in a manner most favorable to the non-moving party, there exists no genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id.

Alley, in this appeal, relies solely on Avila's sworn statement, which said, "I overheard a conversation that someone was out to get him." We find no probative evidence indicating defendants' connection with Avila's statement--that they caused the statement to be made, that they made the statement, or that they were aware that the statement had been made. Alley may not rely on mere allegations, General Business Sys. v. North Am. Philips Corp., 699 F.2d 965, 971 (9th Cir. 1983), but must show that the officials acted with "deliberate indifference" to the threat of serious harm. Berg, 794 F.2d at 459. The "deliberate indifference" standard requires evidence of the officer's individual culpability. Id. Alley has failed to demonstrate the existence of any evidence which would substantiate his assertion that these defendants had any reason to believe that he was in danger.

The grant of summary judgment to the defendants was proper.

AFFIRMED.