context: The district court properly dismissed the retaliation claims because Manning did not sufficiently allege that any defendant retaliated against him for exercising a specific constitutional right.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 880 F.2d 1040, 1045-46
citation_a.parenthetical: finding conclusory allegations insufficient to establish that any individual prison official acted in retaliation for protected conduct
citation_a.sentence: See Bruce v. Ylst, 351 F.3d 1283, 1288 (9th Cir.2003) (explaining that plaintiff must allege that he was retaliated against for exercising a constitutional right and that the retaliatory action did not advance a legitimate peno-logical goal); see also Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045-46 (9th Cir.1989) (finding conclusory allegations insufficient to establish that any individual prison official acted in retaliation for protected conduct).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 351 F.3d 1283, 1288
citation_b.parenthetical: explaining that plaintiff must allege that he was retaliated against for exercising a constitutional right and that the retaliatory action did not advance a legitimate peno-logical goal
citation_b.sentence: See Bruce v. Ylst, 351 F.3d 1283, 1288 (9th Cir.2003) (explaining that plaintiff must allege that he was retaliated against for exercising a constitutional right and that the retaliatory action did not advance a legitimate peno-logical goal); see also Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045-46 (9th Cir.1989) (finding conclusory allegations insufficient to establish that any individual prison official acted in retaliation for protected conduct).