Opinion
No. 19-7551
07-07-2020
DUANE JOSEPH JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; SUHASINI SHAH, M.D., sued in her individual capacity; KATHERINE LAYBOURN, M.D., sued in her individual capacity; BENJAMIN RICE, M.D., sued in his individual capacity; MARK DICOCCO, M.D., sued in his individual capacity; BHAGYA KATTA, sued in his or her individual capacity; SALAM AKBAR, M.D., sued in his or her individual capacity; ALEJANDRO HADDED, sued in his or her individual capacity; IGNATIUS HALL, sued in his or her individual capacity; A. CHATMAN, HSA, Defendants - Appellees.
Duane Joseph Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-01097-CMH-TCB) Before MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Duane Joseph Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Duane Joseph Johnson appeals the district court's order dismissing his claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680 (2018), for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), and granting summary judgment to the Defendants on his claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Johnson v. United States, No. 1:16-cv-01097-CMH-TCB (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 24, 2019 & entered Sept. 25, 2019). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED