NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 24 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DAVID CRAMER, No. 16-15234
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:15-cv-00462-KJM-AC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CITY OF AUBURN; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 11, 2017**
Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
David Cramer appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims in connection
with his arrest and prosecution for battery. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477
(1994). Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The district court properly dismissed Cramer’s claims alleging false arrest
and imprisonment as Heck-barred because success on Cramer’s claims would
necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction, and Cramer failed to show that
his conviction had been invalidated. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87 (if “a judgment
in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or
sentence . . . the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate
that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated”); see also Cabrera v.
City of Huntington Park, 159 F.3d 374, 380 (9th Cir. 1998) (holding that Heck
barred false arrest and false imprisonment claims under § 1983 until conviction
was invalidated).
AFFIRMED.
2 16-15234