T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T ST AN FORD PAUL BR YA NT, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. J . T I M O C H O A , W a r d e n , C h ie f D e p u ty W ar den, i n h i s off

i ci al capaci ty and as an in d iv id u a l; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 55153 D . C. N o . 3 : 0 7 - c v - 0 0 2 0 0 - J M - PCL ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia J e f f r e yT . M i l l e r , S e ni orD i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r10, 2012 ** B efo re: H U G , F A R R IS , an dL E A V Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C al i forni a s t at e pri soner S t anford P aul B ry antappeal s pro se the di stri ct c ourt ’ s s um m a ryj udgm e nti n hi s 42 U . S . C . § 1983 r e t a l i a t i on a c t i on. W e ha ve 

# FI LED JAN 30 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 55153 2 ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o , B ro dh ei m v. Cry , 584 F . 3d 1262, 1267 ( 9th C i r . 2009) , a nd w e a f f i rm a s t o de f

e nda nt s B a s t i da , B r ow n, S t a nf or d, H oppe r , M c N a i r , J a nda , M a gnum , R i e s , C a rne s , G onz a l e s , H a rm on, O c hoa , M udr a , W i l l i a m s , R y a n, R om e r o, B a rr a , a nd R a s ke . W e r e ve r s e a nd re m and as t o d ef

endant s B es t , O l i vare z, and Ji m i nez. T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyg r a n te ds u m m a ryju d g m e n t to d e f e n d a n ts B ast i d a, B ro w n , S t an fo rd , H o p p er, M cN ai r, Jan d a, M ag n u m , R i es, C arn es, G o n z a le s , H a rm o n , O c h o a , M u d r a , W illia m s , R y a n , R o m e r o , B a rr a , a n dR a s k e . B ry antfa i l ed t o d em on stra t e the exi st ence of a genui ne di sput e of m at er i al fa ctas to w h e th e rth o s e d e f

e n d a n ts ’ a c tio n s w e r e m o tiv a te db yB ry a n t’s p r o te c te da c tiv ity o rs e rv e dn o le g itim a te p e n o lo g ic a l g o a l. Se e B r o dh e im , 5 8 4 F .3 da t 1 2 6 9 n .3 ( s e ttin g f o rth th e e le m e n ts o f

ar e ta lia tio n c la im in th e p r is o n c o n te x t) ; B ruce v. Y l st , 351 F . 3d 1283, 1288 ( 9th C i r . 2003) ( t o s urvi ve s um m a ryj udgm e nt , the p r is o n e rm u s t “p u t f

o rth e v id e n c e o f

r e ta lia to rym o tiv e ” ) ; P r at t v . R ow land , 65 F . 3d 802, 806 ( 9th C i r . 1995) ( “ [ A ] s uc c e s s f ul r e t a l i a t i on c l a i m r e qui r e s af i ndi ng tha t‘ the pr i s on author i t i e s ' r e t a l i a t orya c t i on di d nota dva nc e l e gi t i m a t e goa l s of the corre ct i on al i nst i tut i on or w as no tt ai l ored narrow l y e no ug h t o achi eve s uch g o a ls .’” ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) .11- 55153 3 T h e d i stri ctco u rterred i n g ran t i n g su m m ary j u d g m en tt o d efen d an tB est because B ry antdem on stra t ed the exi st ence of a genui ne di sput e of m at er i al fa ctas t o w hether B es tre t al i at ed agai nstB ry antby hara ss i ng hi m , usi ng un nece ss ary f o r c e , a n df

ilin g af a ls e r e p o rt. Se e B r o dh e im , 584 F . 3d a t1271 ( t o s urvi ve sum m ary j ud gm ent , the pri soner “ need on l y putforth evi dence of re t al i at ory m ot i ve , tha t , t a ke n i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o hi m , pr e s e nt s age nui ne i s s ue of m a t e r i a l f

a c ta s t o [ the de f

e nda nt ’ s ] i nt e nt . ” ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on a nd c i t a t i on o m itte d ) ) . T he di stri ctcourterre d i n g rant i ng sum m ary j ud gm entt o d ef endantO l i vare z because agenu i ne di sput e of m at er i al fa ctexi st s a s t o w hether O l i vare z r et al i at ed a g a in s t B ry a n t b yth r e a te n in g a n dh a r a s s in g h im a n db yf ilin g af a ls e r e p o rt. See B r o dh e im , 584 F . 3d a t1270 ( “ [ T ] he m e r e thr e a tof ha rm c a n be a n a dve r s e a c t i on, r e ga r dl e s s of

w he the ri ti s c a rr i e d outbe c aus e the thr e a ti t s e l f c a n ha ve ac hi l l i ng e f f e c t.” ) ; Hi nes v . G om ez , 10 8 F . 3d 26 5, 26 9 (9th C i r. 19 97 ) ( “ [W ] here a pri soner a lle g e s ac o rr e c tio n a l o f f ic e rh a s f a ls e lya c c u s e dh im o f

v io la tin g ap r is o n ru le in re t al i at i on for the pri soner’ s e xerc i se of hi s c on st i tut i on al ri gh t s, the corre ct i on al offi ce r’ s a cc usat i on i s notent i t l ed t o the ‘ som e e vi dence’ st andard of revi ew that w e a f f o r dd is c ip lin a rya d m in is tr a tiv e d e c is io n s .” ) .11- 55153 4 F i na l l y , the di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d i n gr ant i ng s um m a ryj udgm e ntt o de f e nda nt Ji m i nez because agenu i ne di sput e of m at er i al fa ctexi st s a s t o w hether J i m i nez th re aten ed B ry an t an dk n o w in g ly sig n ed a f alse re p o rt in re tali atio n fo r B ry an t’ s p r o te c te da c tiv ity . Se e B r o dh e im , 5 8 4 F .3 da t 1 2 7 0 ( ath r e a t n e e dn o t b e “e x p lic it a n ds p e c if

ic to c o n s titu te a n a d v e r s e a c tio n ” ) ; B ruce , 351 F . 3d a t1288- 89 ( pr i s on of f i c i a l ’ s a l l e ge d s t a t e m e nt s a l l udi ng t o pr ot e c t e d a c t i vi tya s aj us t i f i c a t i on f or a d v e r s e a c tio n r a is e dtr iab le is s u e a s to r e ta lia to rym o tiv e w h e n c o m b in e dw ith s u s p e c t tim in g ) . A F F I R M E D in p a r t , R E V E R S E D a n d R E M A N D E D in p a r t .