Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendants-prison officials’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that defendants violated plaintiff-prisoner’s 1st Amendment rights by preventing him for fasting properly during Ramadan. Record contained dispute as to why defendant did not receive appropriate “meal bags” for two days during Ramadan, which precluded issuance of summary judgment in defendants’ favor, and Ct. rejected defendants’ claim that denial of said meal bags did not constitute substantial burden on plaintiff’s free exercise of religion rights, since jury could find that defendants effectively forced plaintiff to choose between his religions practices and daily nutrition. Moreover, jury could find that all named defendants were personally involved in denying instant meal bags, and that plaintiff was eligible to receive nominal and punitive damages.