UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION
September 25, 2009
LOPEZ, JUAN CARLOS VALADEZ PLAINTIFF,
MICHAEL CHERTOFF, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Ronald S.W. Lew Senior U.S. District Court Judge
ORDER Re: DEFENDANT YAKOV GRINBERG'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ; STIPULATION RESETTING PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND TRIAL DATE 
Currently before the Court is Defendant Yakov Grinberg's Motion for Summary Judgment as to the medical-related allegations set forth in Plaintiff's Second, Fourth, Fifth and Twelfth Causes of Action. Having considered all papers and arguments, THE COURT NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS:
As a preliminary matter, the Court GRANTS the Stipulation and Proposed Order Resetting Hearing on Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment, Pretrial, and Trial.
The Court hereby sets the Final Pretrial Conference for December 7, 2009 and Trial for January 12, 2010.
The Court GRANTS Defendant Grinberg's Motion for Summary Judgment as to the medical-related allegations set forth in the Second, Fourth, Fifth and Twelfth Causes of Action.
Summary judgment is appropriate when the pleadings, affidavits, and other supporting papers demonstrate that there are no genuine issues of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to prevail as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). When making this determination, the Court must view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). A "genuine" dispute is one that is supported by evidence sufficient to permit a reasonable jury to find in favor of the nonmoving party. Id. at 247-48.
Having reviewed the matter, the Court finds that Defendant Grinberg had no personal participation in Plaintiff's alleged denial of medical care. Furthermore, the Court finds that there are no genuine issues of material fact as to whether Defendant acted with deliberate indifference in denying medical care to Plaintiff.
The evidence presented by Plaintiff fails to establish any genuine issue that Defendant had a subjective awareness of Plaintiff's medical needs and acted with deliberate indifference thereafter. As a result, and pursuant to Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (2009), Plaintiff has failed to establish that Defendant's own actions led to any violation of Plaintiff's constitutional rights.
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant Yakov Grinberg's Motion for Summary Judgment as to the medical-related claims in the Second, Fourth, Fifth and Twelfth Causes of Action.
As there are no remaining claims against Defendant Yakov Grinberg, Grinberg is hereby dismissed from this lawsuit.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.