Rivera v. Redfern, 98 F.4th 419, 2024 WL 1561674 (3d Cir. April 11, 2024) (Hardiman, C.J.).
Michael Rivera appeals the District Court’s summary judgment in favor of four prison officials on his Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim. Because the officials are entitled to qualified immunity, we will affirm.
We agree with the District Court that Rivera fails to demonstrate that this specific right has been clearly established by: (1) binding precedent from the Supreme Court or the Third Circuit, see Fields v. City of Philadelphia, 862 F.3d 353, 361 (3d Cir. 2017); or (2) “a robust consensus of cases of persuasive authority” in our sister circuits, Clark v. Coupe, 55 F.4th 167, 181 (3d Cir. 2022) (citation omitted).
The prison officials in this case faced conflicting obligations. By choosing to forcibly extract Miller from his cell without first returning Rivera to his cell, they knowingly caused Rivera to suffer an asthma attack. But because that decision was not made in derogation of clearly established law, the officials are entitled to qualified immunity. We will affirm the District Court’s judgment to that effect.
