*2 Before WILSON and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges, and WOOD, ∗ District Judge. PER CURIAM:

Defendants/Appellants Iris Tatom, Brandi Clouser, and Alecia Craft appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. “[W]e lack interlocutory appellate jurisdiction over the denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds where the sole issues on appeal are issues of evidentiary sufficiency.” Cottrell v. Caldwell , 85 F.3d 1480, 1485 (11th Cir. 1996). Here, the district court’s denial of qualified immunity was based on its “find[ing] that there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether Tatom, Clouser, and Craft were deliberately indifferent to [the prisoner’s] serious medical need.” And the only issue raised by the defendants in their appellate brief is “[w]hether there was sufficient evidence to support a permissible inference as a matter of law that any of [the defendants] were deliberately ∗ Honorable Lisa Godbey Wood, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Georgia, sitting by designation.

indifferent to a known medical need.” Br. of Appellants at 2 (“Statement of the Issue”); see also id . at iii (“The appeal presents a factually complex question concerning whether there was evidence sufficient to defeat summary judgment …. The issue which arises is whether there was sufficient evidence of the subjective intent of the [defendants] to support an inference that any of … them was deliberately indifferent to a known serious medical need.”).

Because the “sole issues on appeal are issues of evidentiary sufficiency,” Cottrell , 85 F.3d at 1485, we lack interlocutory appellate jurisdiction.

DISMISSED.