Mike Miller v. Dillon Rock

Did the Ninth Circuit depart from this Court’s decisions in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) and Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U.S. 765

in denying qualified immunity to Miller based upon the absence of a constitutional violation, where the duration of a law enforcement canine’s bite lasts only while a reportedly armed suspect resists arrest and ends when officers gain control of the suspect?

Did the Ninth Circuit err by concluding that Rock’s unspoken state of mind as he was being bit and held by Toby is a material fact that must be resolved by a jury before applying qualified immunity?

Did the Ninth Circuit fail to analyze Rock’s conduct, and Officer Miller’s response to that conduct, by reference to multiple body worn camera footage clearly showing the facts and circumstances of Rock’s arrest, including his active resistance?

Did the Ninth Circuit err in denying Miller qualified immunity by considering clearly established law at too high a level of generality rather than giving particularized consideration to the facts and circumstances of this case?