FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 04 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TRAVIS IRVIN MIDDLETON, No. 13-56877
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:07-cv-08089-SVW-
AGR
v.
RAUL VASQUEZ; et al., MEMORANDUM*
Defendants - Appellees,
and
RICK VON GELDERN; NATIONAL
UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
OF PITTSBURGH, PA,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 25, 2015**
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Middleton’s
request for oral argument, set forth in his opening brief, is denied.
Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Travis Irvin Middleton appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging civil rights violations related to his
state court conviction for indecent exposure. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo. Beets v. County of Los Angeles, 669 F.3d 1038, 1041
(9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)); Hebbe
v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010) (dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(b)(6)). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed as Heck-barred Middleton’s claims
against the Santa Barbara County defendants because success on his claims would
necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction, and Middleton failed to allege
that his conviction has been invalidated. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87 (holding
that, “in order to recover damages for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or
imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would
render a conviction or sentence invalid,” a plaintiff must prove “that the conviction
or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order,
declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or
called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus”).
We do not consider the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of
2 13-56877
Middleton’s cause of action for sedition and of all claims against defendant Alliant
Insurance Services, Inc. See Indep. Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925,
929 (9th Cir. 2003) (issues not argued on appeal are waived).
We reject Middleton’s contention that his constitutional rights were violated
by the district court’s dismissal of his complaint.
AFFIRMED.
3 13-56877