With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". that the carefully prepared processing table contained no folder or photograph for her, the reasonableness of her continued detention diminished. Nevertheless, the police could have hypothesized that her folder had been misplaced, and it was not objectively unreasonable to delay releasing her from custody pending final verification of her status. See Rogers v. Powell, 120 F.3d 446, 456 (3d Cir.1997). There remains the approximately thirty minutes during which the police completed routine paperwork and awaited a cuff cutter after they had reached the inescapable conclusion that there had never been a warrant for Wilson’s arrest. Although the issue is close, we conclude that Dunford continued to enjoy qualified immunity during this final thirty minutes of detention. Cf. id. at 456-57 (<HOLDING>). After confirming Wilson’s identity and her

A: holding that qualified immunity is not merely immunity from damages but also immunity from suit
B: holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity
C: holding that where defendant claiming qualified immunity relies on facts that are in dispute qualified immunity cannot be granted
D: holding that police did not enjoy qualified immunity for a period where they acknowledged that plaintiff had to be released but nevertheless kept him handcuffed
D.