
USCA1 Opinion

	




          July 25, 1996                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 96-1184                                SAMUEL A. WILSON, JR.,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                                 GEORGE VOSE, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND                    [Hon. Ronald R. Lagueux, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                          Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Samuel A. Wilson, Jr. on brief pro se.            _____________________            Jeffrey  B. Pine,  Attorney General, and William  M. Kolb, Special            ________________                         ________________        Assistant  Attorney  General,  on  brief for  appellees  George  Vose,        William Chang, Joseph Marocco and Sharon McMann.            J.  Renn Olenn  and Olenn  & Penza on  brief for  appellee William            ______________      ______________        Chang, M.D.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.  Appellant Samuel  Wilson, Jr., appeals                      __________            from the district court's  sua sponte dismissal of  his claim            that  prison officials were  deliberately indifferent  to his            serious medical  needs in violation of  the Eighth Amendment.            Finding appellant's  claims of error to be  without merit, we            affirm substantially for the  reasons given by the magistrate            judge in his report and recommendation dated October 6, 1995,            which the district court adopted as its decision.                      Affirmed.                      _________                                         -2-
