Attorney to use or disclose the communications in the Domestic Case. 12 . This exhibit was filed under seal. 13 . McGowen moved for a stay of any discovery directed to him, arguing that “it is proper for discovery to be stayed pending resolution of the immunity defense.” (Mot. for Protective Order Against Discovery of McGowen 1.) While this may be generally true, McGowen attached evidence to his motion to dismiss that is outside the pleadings and requires conversion to summary judgment. This renders McGowen’s argument opposing discovery less compelling. In addition, the question of whether McGowen is entitled to quasi-judicial immunity turns, in part, on whether McGowen exceeded the scope of his appointment as Parenting Coordinator. See Demoran v. Witt, 781 F.2d 155, 158 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>); Doe v. Hennepin Cty., 623 F.Supp. 982, 986
holding that prosecutors have absolute immunity holding that the nevada state board of medical examiners and its members are functionally comparable to judges and prosecutors  and are entitled to absolute immunity for their quasijudicial acts holding that a janitorial workers sexual assault of a student deviated from his duties and was clearly outside of the scope of his employment holding an individual who acts outside the scope of a conspiracy cannot bind his coconspirators holding that absolute immunity cannot attach to a quasijudicial officer if his actions are clearly and completely outside the scope of his jurisdiction