Escalera-Salgado v. United States, 911 F.3d 38

On Oct. 29, 2011, HSI agents and Puerto Rico police executed a pre-dawn search at Escalera's residence after being told he was a drug trafficker, gang leader, and likely armed.
HSI agents forced entry after knocking and announcing; apartment was dark except for agents' flashlights.
Escalera emerged from a bedroom, ignored commands to show his hands, lifted his shirt, reached toward his waistband, and moved behind a bedroom wall.
Before a weapon was observed, two HSI agents fired; Escalera was shot in the elbow; no weapon was found on him or in the apartment. Search later recovered cocaine, cash, and a gun cleaning kit.
Escalera, his wife, and children sued the United States under the FTCA for battery; the district court (magistrate judge) credited the Government’s version of events, assumed battery established, but granted judgment for the U.S. on qualified-immunity–style analysis.
The court of appeals affirmed, concluding plaintiffs failed to show the officers violated "clearly established" law at the time of the shooting.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officers’ use of deadly force was unlawful under clearly established law	Escalera contends officers used excessive force when they shot him while he posed no proven weapon threat	U.S. argues officers reasonably believed Escalera was reaching for a weapon given warnings and his noncompliance	Court held plaintiff failed to identify controlling or clearly analogous precedent; officers’ conduct was not shown to violate clearly established law
Whether qualified-immunity–style inquiry applies to FTCA claims in Puerto Rico	Escalera did not contest district court’s assumption that the defense could apply	U.S. relied on First Circuit precedent treating Puerto Rico FTCA liability as aligned with qualified immunity principles	Court did not decide the broader question but accepted the district court’s assumed framework for this case
Derivative claims by wife and children	Plaintiffs argued family members may recover for harms from the shooting	U.S. argued family claims are derivative of Escalera’s claim	Court affirmed dismissal of derivative claims as dependent on viability of the principal claim
Burden of proof on clearly established law	Escalera argued district court misapplied burden and precedent	U.S. argued plaintiff bears burden to show controlling or a robust consensus of authority	Court reiterated that plaintiff bears the burden and failed to satisfy it

Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (establishes "clearly established" inquiry for qualified immunity)
Ashcroft v. al‑Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (requires existing precedent to place question beyond debate)
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (recognizes implied damages remedy against federal officers)
Díaz‑Nieves v. United States, 858 F.3d 678 (1st Cir.) (FTCA waiver context; discussion of Puerto Rico law and immunity)
Solis‑Alarcón v. United States, 662 F.3d 577 (1st Cir.) (assumption that Puerto Rico tort law parallels federal qualified immunity)
Soto‑Cintrón v. United States, 901 F.3d 29 (1st Cir.) (similar caution about mirroring qualified immunity in Puerto Rico FTCA cases)
Rivera‑Corraliza v. Morales, 794 F.3d 208 (1st Cir.) (places burden on plaintiff to show defense inapplicable)
Carnaby v. City of Houston, 636 F.3d 183 (5th Cir.) (example of finding officer’s use of force reasonable)