Minnesota inmate Robert Hampson appeals following the district court’s 1 granting of appellees’ motions for summary judgment in Hampson’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Hampson had alleged that the prison’s health unit failed to timely refill his prescriptions for blood pressure medication, and that the named appellees were not sufficiently responsive to his complaints. Upon de novo review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not err as the summary judgment record establishes that no appellee was deliberately indifferent to Hampson’s need for timely refills of his medication. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-06, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976). We also reject his arguments that the district court abused its discretion in granting summary judgment when it did, and in refusing to appoint counsel for him.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.