Lewis 256207 v. Aaron, 2:16-cv-00057

Plaintiff Romando Lewis, a pro se prisoner, was placed in administrative segregation at Alger Correctional Facility (LMF) on July 13, 2015.
While in segregation he received limited hygiene: two packs of segregation toothpaste, a toothbrush, and two bars of soap; he did not initially receive shower shoes or lotion, items subject to approval under the segregation policy.
Lewis alleges that Defendants David Aaron and Joseph Naeyaert denied him shower shoes, toothpaste, and lotion in retaliation for his complaints/grievances, and that the lack of supplies caused a scalp rash.
Lewis filed a grievance on July 17, 2015; after filing the grievance he received shower shoes and lotion.
Defendants moved for summary judgment arguing Lewis cannot prove a retaliation claim and, alternatively, are entitled to qualified immunity. Lewis did not file a response.
The magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment for Defendants, concluding Lewis failed to show protected conduct preceded the denial and thus no constitutional violation; qualified immunity was also warranted.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether denial of hygiene items constituted First Amendment retaliation	Lewis: his complaints/grievances about being denied items were protected conduct and the subsequent (or continuing) denial was retaliatory	Aaron/Naeyaert: denial was pursuant to segregation policy and occurred before any grievance; complaints post-dated the initial denial and therefore could not be the motivating factor	Court: Lewis failed to show protected conduct preceded the denial; no causal link; retaliation claim fails
Whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity	Lewis: (implicitly) defendants violated clearly established rights by denying items in retaliation	Defendants: even if actions occurred, they did not violate clearly established law and were objectively reasonable under policy	Court: because no constitutional violation shown, qualified immunity applies

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (assessment of genuine issues for trial)
Thaddeus–X v. Blatter, 175 F.3d 378 (6th Cir. 1999) (elements of prisoner First Amendment retaliation claim)
Smith v. Campbell, 250 F.3d 1032 (6th Cir.) (protected conduct must be a substantial or motivating factor)
Mount Healthy Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (causation / motivating-factor framework)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (qualified immunity standard)
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (qualified immunity—sequence of analysis)
Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (objective reasonableness inquiry for qualified immunity)
Muhammad v. Close, 379 F.3d 413 (accepting nonmovant's direct evidence at summary judgment)