Can every reasonable officer be found to have concluded that there was insufficient probable cause to interview Mara?

Even if the facts admitted any ambiguity as to Maras arrest status on January 2, 2013, which we conclude they do not, police officers aware of the totality of circumstances just detailedparticularly, Maras agreement to a police meeting and the officers express statement to Mara that he was always free to leave the interviewcould reasonably have believed that Mara would not have understood himself to be under arrest at the interview and, therefore, that probable cause was not required to speak with him. Certainly no clearly established law would have compelled "every reasonable officer" to have concluded otherwise in the context described. Messerschmidt v. Millender , 565 U.S. at 546, 132 S.Ct. 1235. Accordingly, as a matter of law, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on Maras federal and state claims of unlawful arrest on January 2, 2013.