With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (finding allegations that the defendants’ conduct “caused [the] [p]laintiff pain, injury[,] and unnecessary suffering ... imply that [their] use of force was more than de minimis” (italics omitted)); Caldwell v. Winston, No. 09-CV-580, 2010 WL 4163034, at *5 (N.D.N.Y. July 23, 2010) (finding objective test satisfied where the plaintiff “allege[d] that he was bleeding as a result of the assault and also that he has suffered substantial periods of pain in his neck and sharp pain in his hands”), adopted sub nom. Caldwell v. Gettmann, 2010 WL 3430036 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2010). That Plaintiff “need[ed] surgery on [his] right hand,” and “had to get [his] eyes flushed,” (see Compl. § II), reinforces the inference that the amount of force used was excessive, see D’Attore, 2012 WL 5601406, at *6 (<HOLDING>); Vail, 2013 WL 5406637, at *6 (“The very

A: holding that the severity of the plaintiff s injuries for which he sought medical attention and received treatment supports the reasonable inference that the amount of force used by the defendant was excessive
B: holding that the risk posed to third parties by the official use of force is not to be considered in determining whether an official used excessive force as against a particular plaintiff
C: holding that a military police officer was entitled to qualified immunity from an excessive force suit when he objectively reasonably believed that he used reasonable force
D: holding that a fourth amendment excessive force analysis requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case including the severity of the crime at issue whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight
A.