Unpublished Dispositionjames Henry, Plaintiff,marshall Bryant, Plaintiff-appellant, v. John Jabe; Herbert B. Grinage; Fred Goff; Robin Pratt;captain Hensely; Ames, Lt.; C. Clark, Sgt.; G. Mohon,sgt.; D. Hilliker, Sgt.; G. Garrison, Sgt.; C/o Taylor;prelesnik, Deputy, Defendants-appellees, 881 F.2d 1076 (6th Cir. 1989)

Before DAVID A. NELSON and BOGGS, Circuit Judges, and HENRY R. WILHOIT, Jr., District Judge.^* 

ORDER

This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the briefs and record, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).

Plaintiffs Bryant and Henry filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several employees of the Michigan Department of Corrections. Plaintiffs claimed that defendants acted to deprive them of various constitutional rights while they were incarcerated at the State Prison of Southern Michigan. The magistrate to whom the case was referred recommended granting summary judgment for defendants. The district court adopted the recommendation, over plaintiffs' objections, and the instant appeal followed. Plaintiff Bryant, the only signatory to the notice of appeal, is the sole appellant. The parties have briefed the issues, Bryant proceeding pro se.

Upon consideration, we find that the district court correctly decided the issues on summary judgment. Plaintiff Bryant's eighth amendment claims are completely lacking in legal or factual support. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-7 (1976); Walker v. Mintzes, 771 F.2d 920, 925-26 (6th Cir. 1985). The fourteenth amendment claim, that he was unjustly kept in administrative segregation prior to his transfer to Marquette Branch Prison, is also meritless. The record contains no evidence of this and, in fact, reflects that Bryant's continued segregation was attributable to his request for protection from a legion of hostile fellow prisoners.

Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.