(PC) McRae v. Dikran et al, No. 1:2016cv01066 - Document 112 (E.D. Cal. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING Findings and Recommendations, GRANTING Defendant Bairamian's Motion for Summary Judgment as to Bivens Claims, and DECLINING to exercise Supplemental Jurisdiction over Plaintiff's State Law Claims against Defendant Bairamian 80 , 104 signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 7/15/2021. Defendant, Bairamian dismissed from this action. (Lundstrom, T)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL SCOTT McRAE, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. BAIRAMIAN DIKRAN, et al., Defendants. 16 No. 1:16-01066-NONE-GSA-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING DEFENDANT BAIRAMIAN’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO BIVENS CLAIMS, AND DECLINING TO EXERCISE SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION OVER PLAINTIFF’S STATE LAW CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT BAIRAMIAN (Doc. No. 80, 104.) 17 ORDER 18 19 20 Michael Scott McRae (“Plaintiff”) is a former federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in 21 forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 22 U.S. 388 (1971). The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 23 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 24 On April 28, 2021, findings and recommendations were entered by the assigned 25 magistrate judge, recommending that defendant Dr. Bairamian’s motion for summary judgment, 26 filed on October 23, 2020, be granted. (Doc. No. 104.) The parties were granted fourteen days 27 in which to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) The fourteen-day deadline 28 has now expired, and no objections have been filed. 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 2 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, 5 1. The findings and recommendations entered on April 28, 2021, are adopted in full; 6 2. The motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Dr. Bairamian on October 7 8 23, 2020, is granted as to plaintiff’s Bivens claims under the Eighth Amendment; 3. 9 The court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s state law claims brought against defendant Bairamian by plaintiff; 10 4. Summary judgment is granted to defendant Dr. Bairamian; 11 5. This case now proceeds only against defendants David Betz and Kevin Cuong 12 Nguyen on plaintiff’s Bivens claims for inadequate medical care and state law 13 claims for medical malpractice and medical battery; 14 6. this action on the court’s docket; and 15 16 The Clerk of Court is directed to reflect defendant Dr. Bairamian’s dismissal from 7. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. 17 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 15, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
