With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 980 F.2d at 306; United States v. Burzynski Cancer Research Institute, 819 F.2d 1301, 1310 (5th Cir.1987), cert. denied sub nom. Wolin v. United States, 484 U.S. 1065, 108 S.Ct. 1026, 98 L.Ed.2d 990 (1988); Saldana v. Garza, 684 F.2d 1159, 1163 n. 14 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1012, 103 S.Ct. 1253, 75 L.Ed.2d 481 (1983). 107 . See Tamez v. City of San Marcos, Texas, 118 F.3d 1085, 1091-92 (5th Cir.1997); and Cronen v. Texas Department of Human Services, 977 F.2d 934, 939 (5th Cir.1992). 108 . See Tamez v. City of San Marcos, Texas, 118 F.3d at 1091-92. 109 . See, e.g., Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526, 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2815, 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985); Salas v. Carpenter, 980 F.2d at 305; Jackson v. City of Beaumont Police Department, 958 F.2d 616, 620 (5th Cir.1992), (<HOLDING>); Gaines v. Davis, 928 F.2d 705, 706-07 (5th

A: holding immunity from liability is not jurisdictional
B: holding individual officers entitlement to qualified immunity does not immunize municipalities from monell liability
C: holding that one of the principal purposes of the qualified immunity doctrine is to shield officers not only from liability but also from defending against a lawsuit
D: holding that qualified immunity is not merely immunity from damages but also immunity from suit
C.