Plaintiff has not provided any admissible evidence of injuries suffered, nor has he presented evidence of the version of events presented in his Amended Complaint, or to contradict that Defendants' use of force “could plausibly have been thought necessary”, Griffin, 604 F.3d at 954. See, e.g., Davis v. Agosto, 89 Fed.Appx. 523, 525 (6th Cir. 2004) (use of mace to attain control of a prisoner not malicious or sadistic when made in a good-faith effort to restore discipline); see also Combs v. Wilkinson, 315 F.3d 548, 557 (6th Cir 2002); Hicks v. Goff, 2019 WL 5685383, at *3 (S.D. Ohio) (dismissing excessive force claim where “Defendants could have reasonably perceived a serious threat that necessitated utilization of force, including their deployment of mace”).