are entitled to qualified immunity. We reverse the district court’s decision relating to those remaining federal claims and remand with instructions to dismiss all claims as to all Defendants other than Nuti and to dismiss all claims as to Nuti, with the exception of Plaintiffs first, fifth, and eighth claims. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED with instructions. The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal. *** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. 1 . This instruction to dismiss, of course, does not apply to Plaintiffs state-law slander and defamation claim, which Defendants concede we do not have jurisdiction to review. See Billington v, Smith, 292 F.3d 1177, 1191 (9th Cir. 2002)
holding that an interlocutory appeal lies from a denial of summary judgment on a qualified immunity claim recognizing that this court considers only legal questions when considering interlocutory appeal from denial of qualified immunity holding that the court lacked appellate jurisdiction over a partial summary judgment on liability in a qualified immunity case holding court lacked jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeal of denial of motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity by defendants who were not public officials holding that the court lacked jurisdiction over statelaw tort claims on an interlocutory appeal from a denial of qualified immunity