Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Patterson v. Ryan
Citation: 338 F. App'x 727Docket: No. 07-15209
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; July 28, 2009; Federal Appellate Court
Arizona state prisoner Barry Northcross Patterson appeals the district court's judgment regarding his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action concerning violations linked to his kosher meal plan. The appellate court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reviews the dismissal based on exhaustion and summary judgment de novo. The court affirms the district court's decision that Patterson did not exhaust his prison grievance procedures against defendants Wilber, Curran, and Soulvie, citing the requirement for "proper exhaustion" as per Woodford v. Ngo. Summary judgment on Patterson's retaliation claims is also affirmed, as he did not present a genuine issue of material fact to support his allegations, in line with Arpin v. Santa Clara Valley Transp. Agency. However, the court vacates the summary judgment concerning Patterson's free exercise claim due to the district court's lack of consideration of the recent case Shakur v. Sehriro. The appellate court remands to allow the district court to further explore the factual record based on the Turner factors, which assess the relationship between prison regulations and legitimate penological interests, as well as to evaluate whether Patterson's right to kosher meals was violated under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Patterson’s other arguments are deemed unpersuasive. The appellee's motion to withdraw its Emergency Motion to Stay Appellate Proceedings is granted, and each party will bear its own costs on appeal. The disposition is affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded, with the note that it is not precedential except as stipulated by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.