The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is defendant Thompson's motion for summary judgment.*fn1
A. Plaintiff's Allegations
The court has summarized plaintiff's claims as follows: Plaintiff's complaint raises issues with disparage treatment he claims he received from various prison staff for complaining about the use of racial epithets. He claims defendant Mauck used the word "nigger" either to or around him. When he complained of the use of that language, defendant Mauck discriminated against him by changing his job in the canteen. He then filed a grievance and defendant Thompson changed his job assignment again. He alleges these two defendants violated his Equal Protection rights as he was treated differently because of his race.
Defendant Thompson submits that there are no relevant facts in dispute. Specifically, defendant contends that plaintiff admitted during his deposition that defendant Thompson did not racially discriminate against him. As relevant to defendant Thompson, the undersigned finds the following facts are undisputed.
1. At the times relevant to this case, plaintiff was incarcerated at High Desert State Prison (HDSP);
2. Plaintiff is an African-American male inmate;
3. Plaintiff began working in the canteen at HDSP on June 6, 2009;
4. On August 6, 2009, plaintiff was reassigned to a kitchen job in Facility D;
5. During the time plaintiff was assigned to the kitchen job, August 6, 2009 through August 25, 2009, he was called to work on August 11, 13, 14, and 15, 2009.
6. Plaintiff was reassigned to a job as an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) assistant, on August 25, 2009;
7. In August 2009, defendant Thompson was a Facility D dining hall officer, whose duties included providing security for the dining hall ...