1087. “Deliberate indifference” exists when a prison official “knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health and safety; the official must be both aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, and he must also draw the inference.” Farmer, 511 U.S. at 835, 114 S.Ct. 1970. a. Objective Requirement Plaintiff alleges that the complete deprivation of outdoor exercise from November 8, 2005 to December 16, 2005 resulting from Giurbino’s decision to implement lockdown and modified lockdown restrictions constituted cruel and unusual punishment {See FAC at 3.) The Ninth Circuit has stated that “regular outdoor exercise is extremely important to the psychological and physical well being of the inmates.” Spain, 600 F.2d at 199 (<HOLDING>). However, as the Ninth Circuit further
holding that deliberate indifference to prisoners medical needs is cruel and unusual punishment holding that prisoners in longterm and continuous segregation must be provided regular outdoor exercise unless inclement weather unusual circumstances or disciplinary needs make it impossible holding denial of outdoor recreation for thirteen days not cruel and unusual punishment holding that the eighth amendment protects prisoners only from deliberate indifference to their serious medical needs recognizing that there may be unusual cases when an attorney can make a rational decision that investigation is unnecessary