FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 13 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MICHAEL HORBERT, No. 11-17533
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-03130-SI
v.
MEMORANDUM *
B. CURRY, Warden; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Susan Illston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 8, 2012 **
Before: ALARCÓN, BERZON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Michael Horbert, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his
constitutional rights were violated in a prison disciplinary hearing that deprived
*
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).
him of time credits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de
novo. See Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We
affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Horbert’s action because Horbert failed
to allege that the results of the disciplinary hearing had been invalidated. See
Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 648 (1997) (“claim for declaratory relief and
money damages, based on allegations . . . that necessarily imply the invalidity of
the punishment imposed,” including the deprivation of good-time credits, “is not
cognizable under § 1983”); Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994) (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” through
habeas or other means).
AFFIRMED.
2 11-17533