1. Did the Ninth Circuit misapply the clearly
established test 's generality principles by analyzing
the issue so specifically as to create a logical absurdity
relative to principles of Helling v. McKinney ?

2. Did the Ninth Circuit err in applying qualified
immunity by misunderstanding the applicable incident
rate statistics, which drives the quantum of danger?

3. Can state officials be relieved of responsibility
because the California Plata health care Receiver
allegedly did not order them to take more robust
precautions?

Whether the Ninth Circuit misapplied the clearly established test's generality principles by analyzing the issue too specifically, whether the Ninth Circuit erred in applying qualified immunity by misunderstanding the applicable incident rate statistics, and whether state officials can be relieved of responsibility because the California Plata health care Receiver allegedly did not order them to take more robust precautions