got the fence and the the facts are fairly straightforward and simple a team of five a homeland security agents raid an apartment and i only housing project in the very early movement reaching for what could be thought is a weapon in this particular case it's it's perfectly it's clear that the agency did not see a weapon being not see anything resembling  not he thinks that he's going to move behind one of the walls to seeking cover but so it looks like he's reaching for a weapon and moving for cover it really looks like he's reaching for something they don't know what it wa and certainly know no one was hurt no bone was ever was ever found in the police had been told before they got there that he was a gang leader who was story and lift his shirt after disobeying the officers commands to stop moving show his hands after they identify themselves as officers under those circumstances  cetera and repeated that it has never actually held that the federal doctrine of qualified immunity protects the united states and if you see action simply said that those cases comment on the analogy between federal qualified immunity not in this case your honor and there's no need to we are there's no need to reach that question here because there's no question log like virtually every other state recognizes the privilege to use deadly force in self defense yes and that privilege is like a ball for these agents and on the facts of this case is clearly satisfied so there's no need to reach the question of whether qualified immunity is a part of puerto rico's law or question of whether qualified there's no need to reach any of those questions because there's no doubt that under the rules of puerto rico tort law as reflected in the statement and frankly as reflected in the cases that my brother submitted a couple of weeks ago before argument the tort privilege of self defense was there's no question the united states can assert if you look back at rodriguez from the score ninety ninety five it makes clear that as a principle the i c c in a certain privileges of  apply the correct legal rule to those facts that itself is a legal question is this court has held in fenech and numerous other cases when you're reviewing after a bench trial you have the power to do that and there's no doubt on these facts that just the use of force was reasonable under what we know but you have all the factual findings before you to make that conclusion quite clearly quite clear which is that these officers these agents in the course of conducting this operation helping to assist in the execution of the search warrant for drugs and weapons in the apartment it's like a drug dealer intrade you partment encounter an individual who's not complying with their commands and in fact was making extremely threatening movements you know moving for cover you need to argue here the facts are so clear and they often narrow a lot it was and there are yes i think that's exactly what you have here given the factual findings mean certainly before trial where you're at summary judgment and there's disputes about what the i don't think there's any way to conclude other than the use of force in this case was reasonable and to do it as a matter of privilege that attaches to the use of deadly force in self defense rather than as a matter of can you should affirm on the basis of the fact that the privilege which no one questions exists under puerto rico law is clearly satisfied in this case so it doesn't matter you don't need to reach the question of whether qualified immunity even exists under puerto difficult questions about whether qualified immunity under puerto rico laws available to private persons and how that interacts with the standard so rather than interact and deal with those quite thorny questions i would go back and look at the re in other cases recognize that we look to the restatement to fill those gaps or scoundrel my brother has provided some translations in some cases it's an obvious into the court whether to consider those or not but i think if you look at those cases they match perfectly the tort privilege through the use of deadly force in self defense that we were already relying on from the restatement and that is effectively indistinguishable from the standards used in court and the cases as well and so yes the contours of that law are sufficiently clear