met his initial burden of showing that the Defendants’ actions violated a clearly established constitutional right. In assessing whether the law was clearly established on a particular issue, the court must examine decided case law. See Abdul-Akbar v. Watson, 4 F.3d 195, 202 (3d Cir.1993). The Third Circuit has adopted “a broad view of what constitutes an established right of which a reasonable person would have known.” Stoneking v. Bradford Area School District, 882 F.2d 720, 726 (3d Cir.1989) (citations omitted). The Third Circuit does not require strict factual identity between applicable precedent and the ease at issue. Id. (ci jected requests for highly specialized diets because they conflicted with legitimate penological interests. See Kahey v. Jones, 836 F.2d 948 (5th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>); Cooper v. Rogers, 788 F.Supp. 255, 258
holding that limitations placed upon the religious activities of two prison groups found to be religious organizations were reasonable under the circumstances holding that an inmate has a first amendment right to file grievances against prison officials holding that an inmate has no right to any particular prison job but prison officials cannot discriminate against him on the basis of his race in work assignments holding that request from inmate to county jail chaplain to pass information to coeonspir ator was not privileged because the aid requested was not religious and because the request was not intended to be confidential holding prison not required to prepare highly particularized religious dietary request to accommodate mos lem inmate