Did the Ninth Circuit's panel decision denying qualified immunity contravene this Court's mandate that courts should not hold officers to a standard of clearly established law at too high a level of generality and must give particularized consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Sergeant Dan Ponder responded to radio reports that a male suspect was hitting mailboxes, breaking car windows and threatening a woman and her baby. At the scene, Clemente Najera-Aguirre was standing outside a house’s wrought-iron fence armed with a wooden club in his right hand that was pointed toward the ground. The side door to the house was shattered, broken glass was scattered, and one of the residents may have been bleeding. Sergeant Ponder drew his gun in a low-ready position and ordered Najera to drop the club. Najera ignored commands to drop the club and Sergeant Ponder deployed pepper spray, which had no effect on Najera. Sergeant Ponder sprayed Najera with pepper spray a second time, after which Najera held the club in his hand pointed up or in a “batter’s stance,” facing Sergeant Ponder about fifteen feet away. Sergeant Ponder fired six shots at Najera, who died at the scene. The questions presented are: 1. Did the Ninth Circuit’s panel decision denying qualified immunity contravene this Court’s mandate that courts should not hold officers to a standard of clearly established law at too high a level of generality and must give particularized consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, which here involved undisputed facts that, after the officer’s pepper spray deployments failed to overcome Najera’s threats or gain his compliance, and li QUESTIONS PRESENTED—Continued just before shots were fired, Najera was holding a club in an upright position within striking range, facing the officer and posing an immediate threat not only to the officer, but also to bystanders present at the scene in the moments preceding the shooting? 2. Can qualified immunity be denied where no Supreme Court precedent supports the panel decision; and, even assuming circuit precedent may be relied upon in the absence of such precedent, Ninth Circuit precedent exists where that circuit granted qualified immunity and found no constitutional violation involving substantially similar facts (e.g., a sword held upright from a non-advancing subject)? See Blanford v. Sacramento Cnty., 406 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2005).