USCA11 Case: 24-11371 Document: 82-1 Date Filed: 12/19/2025 Page: 1 of 3

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-11371 ____________________

DEVIN BROSNAN, GARRETT ROLFE, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus

KEISHA LANCE BOTTOMS, In her individual and official capacities, PAUL HOWARD, In his individual and official capacities, DONALD HANNAH, In his individual and official capacities, CLINT RUCKER, In his individual and official capacities, THE CITY OF ATLANTA, GEORGIA, et al., Defendants-Appellees. USCA11 Case: 24-11371 Document: 82-1 Date Filed: 12/19/2025 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 24-11371 ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:22-cv-02337-LMM ____________________ * Before BRANCH and LUCK, Circuit Judges, and SCHLESINGER, Dis- trict Judge. PER CURIAM: Police officers Devin Brosnan and Garrett Rolfe brought fed- eral- and state-law claims against Fulton County, Georgia, the city of Atlanta, and a former mayor, police chief, district attorney, as- sistant district attorney, and investigator. Brosnan and Rolfe’s claims were almost identical to the ones brought by three other police officers—Mark Gardner, Lonnie Hood, and Ivory Streeter— in a lawsuit presenting similar facts. A district judge in the North- ern District of Georgia granted motions to dismiss the Gardner law- suit. And a different judge in the same district granted motions to dismiss Brosnan and Rolfe’s claims. The officers in both cases separately appealed the dismissals but the Gardner appeal moved first. Because the two lawsuits were so similar, we stayed Brosnan and Rolfe’s appeal pending our deci- sion in Gardner. That decision came out earlier this year. In Gard- ner v. Bottoms, No. 23-12772, 2025 WL 799282 (11th Cir. Mar. 13,

* Honorable Harvey E. Schlesinger, United States District Judge, for the Mid- dle District of Florida, sitting by designation. USCA11 Case: 24-11371 Document: 82-1 Date Filed: 12/19/2025 Page: 3 of 3

24-11371 Opinion of the Court 3

2025), we affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the three officers’ complaint in a twenty-nine-page opinion. With Gardner decided, we lifted the stay in Brosnan and Rolfe’s appeal and ordered the parties to file supplemental briefs to address the impact of our opinion. Having reviewed the supple- mental briefs, and after hearing from the parties at oral argument, we see no material difference between Gardner and this case. For the same reasons we detailed in our Gardner opinion, we affirm the dismissal of Brosnan and Rolfe’s claims. AFFIRMED.