What is the test for deliberate indifference in the context of an Eighth Amendment claim?

In addition to the guidance provided by the court in previous orders (attached herewith), plaintiff is again informed that, to state an Eighth Amendment claim, plaintiff must plausibly allege that each defendant acted, or failed to act, with a culpable state of mind. The subjective requirement for sustaining a deliberate indifference claim is met by plausible allegations that a prison official "knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or safety; the official must both be aware of the facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, and he must also draw the inference." Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994). "Mere negligence is insufficient for liability. An official's failure to alleviate a

Page 3

significant risk that he should have perceived but did not . . . cannot . . . be condemned as the infliction of punishment. Instead, the official's conduct must have been wanton, which turns not upon its effect on the prisoner, but rather, upon the constraints facing the official." Clement v. Gomez, 298 F.3d 898, 904 (9th Cir. 2002) (citations and internal quotations omitted). Deliberate indifference is "a state of mind more blameworthy than negligence" and "requires 'more than ordinary lack of due care for the prisoner's interests or safety.'" Farmer, 511 U.S. at 835.