Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 9619982
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Terrance Quinlan v. John Conaty
No. 9619982 · Decided June 20, 2024
No. 9619982·Ninth Circuit · 2024·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 20, 2024
Citation
No. 9619982
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 20 2024
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TERRANCE JOE QUINLAN, No. 23-35071
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:21-cv-00991-TSZ
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JOHN CONATY, Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF);
DOUG WHITLEY, Kent Police Dept,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Thomas S. Zilly, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 17, 2024**
Before: CANBY, PAEZ, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.
Terrance Joe Quinlan appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal
Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging claims related to his arrest. We
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Puri v. Khalsa, 844 F.3d 1152, 1157
(9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Quinlan’s action because Quinlan’s
claims do not arise in one of the three contexts the Supreme Court has recognized
for Bivens claims, and thus would require expansion of the Bivens remedy. See
Egbert v. Boule, 596 U.S. 482, 491-93 (2022) (explaining that recognizing a cause
of action under Bivens is “a disfavored judicial activity” and that the presence of an
alternative remedial structure precludes recognizing a Bivens cause of action in a
new context); Mejia v. Miller, 61 F.4th 663, 666 (9th Cir. 2023) (acknowledging
Supreme Court’s reluctance to recognize any new Bivens claims).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 23-35071
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 20 2024 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 20 2024 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT TERRANCE JOE QUINLAN, No.
03MEMORANDUM* JOHN CONATY, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); DOUG WHITLEY, Kent Police Dept, Defendants-Appellees.
04Zilly, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 17, 2024** Before: CANBY, PAEZ, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 20 2024 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Terrance Quinlan v. John Conaty in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 20, 2024.
Use the citation No. 9619982 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.