component, an inmate must show that prison officials had ‘a sufficiently culpable state of mind.’” Brown v. Bargery, 207 F.3d 863, 867 (6th Cir.2000) (quoting Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834, 114 S.Ct. 1970). “Deliberate indifference entails something more than mere negligence, but can be satisfied by something less than acts or omissions for the very purpose of causing harm or with knowledge that harm will result.” Blackmore, 390 F.3d at 895-96 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). “[A]cting or failing to act with deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm to a prisoner is the equivalent of recklessly disregarding that risk.” Farmer, 511 U.S. at 836, 114 S.Ct. 1970. Put simply, the deliberate indifference standard's subjective component requires a plaintiff 0) (<HOLDING>). A number of cases involve the failure to
holding that prescription delay was not violation because plaintiff could not establish detrimental effect of delay in treatment recognizing rule 48b allows courts to dismiss cases for prosecutorial delay even though the delay does not amount to a constitutional violation holding that a twoday delay was insufficient to establish deliberate indifference and citing cases where no deliberate indifference was found after a sixteenday delay a sixday delay and a threemonth delay holding that twoyear delay was not reasonable holding that delay in prescription was not eighth amendment violation because delay was inadvertent and quickly rectified