Parks

*612 MEMORANDUM **

L. Seville Parks (“Parks”) appeals the district court’s grant of defendants’ motion for summary judgment on his claim that defendants impermissibly denied him a kosher diet in violation of his sincerely-held religious beliefs. 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand. 2

We review de novo a district court’s grant of summary judgment. Blanford v. Sacramento County, 406 F.3d 1110, 1114 (9th Cir.2005). “Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, ... and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of that party, we must determine whether the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law and whether there are any genuine issues of material fact.” Galvin v. Hay, 374 F.3d 739, 745 (9th Cir.2004).

Parks argues that the sincerity of his alleged religious belief is a question of material fact that was inappropriately decided on summary judgment. We agree. “To merit protection under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, a religious claim”(l) “must be sincerely held” and (2) “must be rooted in religious belief’. Malik v. Brown, 16 F.3d 330, 333 (9th Cir.1994). “Determining…