Harvell

facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, the defendants are

entitled to qualified immunity.” Id. This court may determine, though, that

insufficient evidence exists to create a genuine issue of material fact as to

particular conduct. Foster v. City of Indio, 908 F.3d 1204, 1217 n.10 (9th Cir.

2018).

Qualified immunity “shields officers from civil liability so long as their

conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

which a reasonable person would have known.” Hawatmeh v. City of Henderson,

159 F.4th 591, 599 (9th Cir. 2025) (internal quotation marks omitted). To

overcome a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must show both (1) that “a

25-719 public official has violated [the] plaintiff’s constitutionally protected right” and (2)

that “the particular right that the official has violated was clearly established at the

time of the violation.” Id. (quoting Shafer v. Cnty. of Santa Barbara, 868 F.3d

1110, 1115 (9th Cir. 2017)).

2. Harvell raises direct Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against

Rigney and Brown. The Eighth Amendment protects “inmates against…