The court, having heard oral argument and reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, holds that there is no reversible error of fact or law.

1. Stone’s claim is time barred because he filed it after the two-year statute of limitations had expired. The limitation period began to run on the date Stone was shot, even though he did not know the true identity of the wrongdoer. Childs v. Haussecker, 974 S.W.2d 31, 36, 40 (Tex. 1998). Stone’s fraudulent concealment argument is waived because it was not pursued in the district court. LeMaire v. La. Dep’t of Transp. & Dev., 480 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 2007).

2. Menchaca was entitled to qualified immunity under well-settled Circuit precedent. Ontiveros v. City of Rosenberg, Tex., 564 F.3d 379, 380 (5th Cir. 2009). Vasquez’ actions posed a serious threat to those around him, and it was reasonable for Menchaca to use deadly force. See Id. at 385.

3. The district court properly dismissed Vasquez’ premises liability and negligent hiring, supervision, and training claims against RL Worth because Vasquez did not point the court to any evidence supporting these claims.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.