Thomas

MEMORANDUM *

Thomas appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants-Appellees Hurley and Span-ski. Thomas argues that the district court erred in holding that the revocation of his Kauai County license to sell firearms did not deprive him of property or liberty without due process of law, and in holding that Hurley and Spanski were entitled to qualified immunity. Under Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001), we first determine whether the plaintiffs allegations, if true, establish the violation of a constitutional right. Id. at 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 . If they do not, the inquiry ends. Id. If they do, we must then decide whether the right is clearly established. Id. At oral argument before this court, Hurley and Spanski argued that they were entitled to qualified immunity even assuming Thomas might have been able to acquire a protected property or liberty interest in his license to sell firearms. We agree that Hurley and Spanski are entitled to qualified immunity.

We assume for purposes of our analysis that the lawful possession of a license to sell guns carries with it a clearly established right to notice and hearing…