From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McRae v. Dikran

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 21, 2021
1:16-cv-01066-NONE-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. Sep. 21, 2021)

Opinion

1:16-cv-01066-NONE-GSA-PC

09-21-2021

MICHAEL SCOTT McRAE, Plaintiff, v. BAIRAMIAN DIKRAN, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL (DOC. NO. 115.)

ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANT NGUYEN FROM THIS CASE, WITH PREJUDICE, BASED ON PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

ORDER DISMISSING ALL PENDING STATE LAW CLAIMS WITHOUT PREJUDICE

ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE

Plaintiff, Michael Scott McRae, is a former federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On July 19, 2021, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that defendant Dr. Nguyen be dismissed from this case, with prejudice, based on plaintiff's failure to prosecute against him. (Doc. No. 115.) The parties were granted fourteen days in which to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) The time for filing objections has expired, and no objections have been filed.

Dr. Nguyen is the only defendant remaining in this case. On July 16, 2021, the court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants Dr. Bairamian and Dr. Betz, dismissing them from this action. (Doc. Nos. 112, 113.)

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on July 19, 2021, (Doc. No. 115) are adopted in full;

2. Defendant Nguyen and the claims against him are dismissed from this case, with prejudice, based on plaintiffs failure to prosecute against him;

3. The court declines to exercise jurisdiction over any of plaintiff s state law claims, and plaintiffs state law claims are dismissed without prejudice;

4. This action is dismissed in its entirety; and

5. The clerk is directed to enter judgment and close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

McRae v. Dikran

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 21, 2021
1:16-cv-01066-NONE-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. Sep. 21, 2021)
Case details for

McRae v. Dikran

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL SCOTT McRAE, Plaintiff, v. BAIRAMIAN DIKRAN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Sep 21, 2021

Citations

1:16-cv-01066-NONE-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. Sep. 21, 2021)