granting summary judgment where plaintiff was unable to identify the individual corrections officers who assaulted him because he "did not offer any evidence opposing [defendant's] version of events" and "it seems that the only reason that [plaintiff] named [defendant] in the complaint is because [defendant's] name was listed on the Notice of Infraction"

In Munoz, the court emphasized that it was granting judgment to the defendant because the plaintiff there, a prison inmate, had offered no evidence to dispute the defendant's version of events, i.e., that he was not present during the alleged attack.