Does the decision below, which misstates a summary judgment record and resolves factual disputes against a nonmovant, warrant summary reversal?

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court has exercised its power to summarily vacate a lower court’s decision when that decision “reflect[ed] a clear misapprehension” of the standards governing summary judgment. See Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650, 659-60 (2014) (per curiam). In the case below, Petitioner submitted evidence that, for roughly twenty-one months at Suwannee Correctional Institution, he experienced persistent gastrointestinal bleeding and pain during bowel movements without receiving any meaningful medical care. The district court granted Respondent summary judgment on the basis that Petitioner had received minimally adequate treatment. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed. It stated that Petitioner “was seen by Gastroenterology” shortly after having been transferred to Suwannee, App. 3a, eventually received “treatment that caused the bleeding to subside,” App. 10a—lla, and ultimately “responded well to ‘routine’ care,” App. 14a. The question presented is: Does the decision below, which misstates a summary judgment record and resolves factual disputes against a nonmovant, warrant summary reversal? 1