Does a plaintiff have to prove that she spoke on a matter of public concern as a private citizen or as a public employee?

Eng v. Cooley, 552 F.3d 1062, 1070 (9th Cir. 2009). Because plaintiff's failure to satisfy a step "necessarily concludes [the] inquiry," Huppert v. City of Pittsburgh, 574 F.3d 696, 703 (9th Cir. 2009), the court addresses only whether (1) plaintiff spoke on a matter of public concern (2) as a private citizen or as a public employee. The court ultimately concludes below that, even though plaintiff spoke on a matter of public concern on some but not all of her claims, plaintiff has not sufficiently alleged that she spoke as a private citizen rather than in her capacity as a public employee.

1. Public Concern