Briscoe-King

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant Wanda Briscoe-King (“Briseoe-King”), formerly employed by the California Department of Corrections (the “CDC”), sued her former supervisors under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , alleging that they had fired her in retaliation for her having made protected statements. Specifically, she alleges that she was fired for having complained about racial discrimination, and for having reported misuse of state vehicles. The district court denied Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and Defendants timely appealed, arguing that there is no triable issue of fact concerning the causal connection between BriseoeKing’s race discrimination complaints and her firing, and that Defendants are qualifiedly immune from suit on the vehicular misuse retaliation claim. The parties are familiar with the facts and proceedings in the district court, which are recited here only as necessary. We affirm.

Initially, we examine our jurisdiction to review these issues. Under the collateral order doctrine, we may review the district court’s denial of qualified immunity, but only to the extent that appellants raise purely legal questions. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 528 , 105 S.Ct.…