constitu tional rights under th e First and Fifth Amendments. Defendants have filed a Moti on to Dismiss [25] pursuant

to

Federal Rules

o f

Civil Procedure 12( b)(I ) and 12(b )(6). Defendant s argue that plaintiffs' claims are moot; that they failed to state either an Establishment Clause or Equal Protection claim; that their

ivens

claim is improper; that the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity; that the court does not have personal jurisdiction over defendant Castillo; and that the plaintiffs failed to allege Castillo's personal involvement. For t he following reasons, defendants' Motion to Dismiss [25] is denied.

F CTU L

B CKGROUND

Plaint iff Jason Holden has been in the custody

ofF I

Sheridan since April 21, 2010. A professed Humanist, Holden alleges that defendants violated his First Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights by their refusal t o authorize either a Humanist study group or an Atheist s tudy group , or

to

recognize Humanism as a religious assignment. When an inmate

s

admitted to FCI Sheridan, he may designate a religious preference assignment, which the institution staf f will then enter into the SENTRY system, a real time information system for processing sensitive but unclassified inmate information necessary for running the institution. At th e time that plaintiffs filed suit, FCI Sheridan recognized the following religious assignments: Atheist, Adventist, American Indian, Buddhist, Catholic, Church

o f

Cluist, Hindu, Jehovah's Witness, Jewish, Messianic, Moorish Science Temple, Mormon, Muslim, Nation ofislam, No Preference, Non-Trinitarian, Otihodox, Other, Pagan, Protesta nt, Rastafarian, Santeria, Sikh, an d Unknown. The FCI Sheridan also permitted the following sub-groups to meet in study groups: Spanish Protestant, Native American Church, Native American (Haw aiian), Dru id, and Odinist/ Asatru. Inmates ofFCI- recogn ized religious assignments are entitled to the following benefits: (1) "proscription days" for religious holidays; 2 - OPI 'l ION AND ORDER