argues that the plaintiff did not engage in protected conduct by threatening to file a grievance, but agrees that “[a]n inmate has an undisputed First Amendment right to file grievances against prison officials on his own behalf.” Thomas v. Eby, 481 F.3d 434, 439 (6th Cir.2007). Nonetheless, the defendant is correct that neither the Sixth Circuit nor the Supreme Court has ad dressed explicitly whether threatening to file a grievance constitutes protected conduct. See Harbin-Bey v. Rutter, 420 F.3d 571, 579 (6th Cir.2005) (finding against the plaintiff who claimed his protected conduct was threatening to file a lawsuit because he had not shown that a prisoner of ordinary firmness would be deterred); Scott v. Kilchermann, 230 F.3d 1359, 2000 WL 1434456, at *2 (6th Cir. Sep. 18, 2000) (<HOLDING>). But see Bridges v. Gilbert, 557 F.3d 541, 555
holding that prisoner justifiably failed to file ordinary grievance when prisoner reasonably believed that department of corrections regulations foreclosed such recourse holding that equal protection claim by prisoner lacked merit where prisoner not similarly situated to others who were permitted to engage in relevant conduct recognizing that officials failure timely to respond to grievance could be basis for prisoner to show he exhausted available administrative remedies holding that a prisoner did not engage in protected conduct when he threatened to file a frivolous grievance holding that a prisoner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies when he did not utilize grievance procedures that permitted waiver of the time limit for good cause