A California state prisoner filed an action alleging retaliatory transfer and deliberate indifference to serious medical needs due to exposure to ETS.  The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated the summary judgment and remanded the case, noting that “[b]efore entering summary judgment, district courts are obligated to advise pro se prisoner litigants that they need to submit responsive evidence to ward off summary judgment.”  The district court did not do so in this case.

1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 24410.