De La Plata v. Revell , 142 F. App'x 218 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                 August 24, 2005
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 04-41121
    Summary Calendar
    JOHNNY MARQUEZ DE LA PLATA, II,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    TIMOTHY J. REVELL, Physician; M. AMIR, Physician;
    DANIEL GIDEON, Physician; MICHAEL KELLY, MD,
    Director of Preventive Medicine; JEAN LOUIS, Doctor;
    CLARENCE MOSELY, Senior Warden; FRANKIE RESCANO,
    Assistant Warden; ROCHELLE MCKINNEY, RN/Medical
    Assistant; UNIDENTIFIED PARTY, Stiles Unit Dietician;
    LYNN ALLEN, Grievance Supervisor,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Texas
    USDC No. 1:01-CV-538-HC-WCR
    --------------------
    Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Johnny Marquez De La Plata, II, appeals the summary judgment
    in favor of the defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint.          In
    his complaint, De La Plata alleged that he received delayed or
    inadequate treatment for his hepatitis C.
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
    under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 04-41121
    -2-
    De La Plata has failed to show a genuine issue for trial
    with regard to his claim that the defendants were deliberately
    indifferent to his serious medical needs.    See Farmer v. Brennan,
    
    511 U.S. 825
    , 847 (1994).   The summary-judgment evidence showed
    that De La Plata received medical care for his hepatitis C and
    any delay in being tested for hepatitis C and/or receiving
    treatment for his condition could be no more than negligence,
    which would not rise to the level of a constitutional violation.
    See Varnado v. Lynaugh, 
    920 F.2d 320
    , 321 (5th Cir. 1991).   His
    disagreement with his medical treatment also does not establish a
    constitutional violation.   
    Id. The judgment
    of the district
    court is affirmed.
    AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-41121

Citation Numbers: 142 F. App'x 218

Judges: Jolly, Owen, Per Curiam, Reavley

Filed Date: 8/25/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023