context: . Although the parties' briefing focuses on the contours of deliberate indifference, the court notes that an actionable Eighth Amendment violation also involves an objective inquiry, namely the seriousness of the inmate's medical need.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.identifier: 104 F.3d 1133, 1136
citation_a.parenthetical: "A determination of 'deliberate indifference' involves an examination of two elements: the seriousness of the prisoner's medical need and the nature of the defendant's response to that need."
citation_a.sentence: McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059-60 (9th Cir.1992) ("A determination of 'deliberate indifference’ involves an examination of two elements: the seriousness of the prisoner's medical need and the nature of the defendant’s response to that need.”), overruled on other grounds by WMX Technologies, Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir.1997); see also Clement, 298 F.3d at 904 (discussing both the objective and subjective elements of an Eighth Amendment claim).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 298 F.3d 904, 904
citation_b.parenthetical: discussing both the objective and subjective elements of an Eighth Amendment claim
citation_b.sentence: McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059-60 (9th Cir.1992) ("A determination of 'deliberate indifference’ involves an examination of two elements: the seriousness of the prisoner's medical need and the nature of the defendant’s response to that need.”), overruled on other grounds by WMX Technologies, Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir.1997); see also Clement, 298 F.3d at 904 (discussing both the objective and subjective elements of an Eighth Amendment claim).