this court should reverse the district court screen of summary judgment determining that mr mcnair did not exhaust administrative remedies because its decision misapplied the summary judgment standard and ignore it this court's binding precedent on the level of specificity required for inmate grievances more specifically the court should reverse for three reasons st the district court improperly required mr mcnair's grievance to include all legally significant provided in the grievance so this is the st issue and a common thread throughout the district court's errors is the standard that the district court was obligated failed to apply under albino v baka as well as griffin v arpaio and arguably i think that those standards are somewhat similar to what was in the regulation what was here in the strong cmdr while investigation occurred here mr kersten proffered no evidence relating to the prison's investigation and instead simply pointed to the ambiguous language in a grievance there's plenty of evidence that could potentially settle this issue including investigation notes from the inspector general who investigated this case surveillance video improperly adopted a higher specificity standard than articulated by this court in raised the court stated that grievances are not meant to lay the groundwork for medication and you only know where the prison to the nature of the wrong for which so looking so we to the language of the grievance as the district court did and drawing inferences in mr mcnair's favor as the district court failed to do this or person simply did not proffer sufficient evidence to show as a matter of law prison officials were not unnoticed determines that the district court was correct in holding as a matter of law ministry of remedies were not exhausted the nd issue is that the district court rejected outright mr mcnair's affidavit in holding as a matter of law mr mcnair did not have the subject of your retaliation including more inflammatory facts mr kirsten's conduct in the grievance under the mic right below has standard there's no subjective and objective prong the subjective evidence at the summary judgment stage that mr air basically was manufacturing a genuine dispute material fact is that this record quite it does not allow a court to disregard admissible evidence unless there's some other doctrine such as the  i do not believe that's in the record all that we have is the conclusion of the investigation which i guess assumes that there was an investigation that occurred and yet we don't know what the nature of that was rd reports produced from it if there were interviews taken or any of that it just require abused its its discretion in dismissing this action with prejudice despite mr kersten seeking judge's report and recommendation the court kind of dealt with this and they all by no case where there was a dispute over whether the th circuit should be reviewed reviewing for did reviewing standard would be d there's an over when that dispute is over to novo application of law it's a factor approach and here mr kirstin is advocating for a particular we harsh sanction that mr mcnair who is proceeding pro se before the district court weighed all objections the legal areas and the magistrate judges report recommendation mr pearson is not identify any other factors that support the sanction and many other factors including mr mcnair's proceed status and even his objections which were styled following that just records entry of judgment as a motion to alter or amend judgment militate against harsh sanction motion to alter or amend judgment noted that there is a clear clearly a genuine dispute pursuant to the federal rules of civil procedure and as a matter of law so unless there are any other questions i urge  enough the st amended complaint i mean part part of it trash that seriously not the original complaint which was initially screened out and the exact allegations set forth in the in the exhaust agree so in other words it could have used the griffin standard even the strong standard as long as the basis requirements that the prison is there where what the problem is we don't need all the legal summary judgment was not sufficient to create a question of fact and this is what is actually a very fact intensive review of the matter after summary judgment presented the argument that this is not  dealt with and judge lee was addressing this on the regulation front as to what is director general was necessarily required to provide here and in many of the other cases such as ra as griffin you actually had a lot more fulsome records you had the prison providing specifics as to what they investigated they provided specifics as to who they investigated how they investigated what allegations they were looking at here we have none and presumably was all available to the movement here mr kersten and yet none of that was provided no affidavits no surveillance videos and so taking the summary judgment standard all we have is an ambiguous complaint and inferences having to be drawn in favor of the non movement and really that's the easiest way to settle this case this appeal the other points i just  i'm subject to belief i'm not going to credit this affidavit because look at everything over here and to me that's just not sufficient as a matter of what we have in the unpublished chris face of cases from twenty seven test i think it was also similar in in mcbride itself which dealt with a late filed a complaint which the court still credited the subjective problem even though the complaint was filed months two months after and yet still didn't necessarily negate the subject of prodding as to whether the prisoner was in fear of submitting a complaint a grievance  misapprehension of the th circuit authority here in presuming that mr mcnear would be limited to the facts in the grievance there's no case found a th circuit that holds that and it's actually to the contrary so if that there are any more questions i urge the panel to reverse the district court's grant of summary judgment for failure to follow this court's precedent on a specific specificity of grievances you know ability to include all inflammatory