Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00334/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00334-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUAN VALDEZ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et 

al.,

 Defendants.

1:14-cv-00334-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH 

NINTH CIRCUIT’S ORDER ISSUED 

ON JUNE 6, 2016

(ECF No. 17.)

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S 

CLAIMS FOR FAILURE TO STATE 

A CLAIM UNDER SECTION 1983, 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO FILING 

A PETITION FOR WRIT OF 

HABEAS CORPUS

ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE 

CASE

Juan Valdez (“Plaintiff”), a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights 

action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), on March 10, 

2014. (ECF No. 1.) On January 28, 2015, findings and recommendations were entered by the 

Magistrate Judge, recommending that Plaintiff’s claims be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure 

to state a claim. (ECF No. 8.) On February 27, 2015, the findings and recommendations were 

adopted by the District Judge, dismissing Plaintiff’s claims, with prejudice, for failure to state a 

claim. (ECF No. 10.) Judgment was entered, and the case was closed. (ECF No. 11.) 

On March 11, 2015, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals. (ECF No. 12.) On June 6, 2015, the Ninth Circuit vacated the judgment and 

Case 1:14-cv-00334-LJO-GSA Document 19 Filed 09/23/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

remanded the case with instructions for the district court to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims without 

prejudice. (ECF No. 17.) The Ninth Circuit cited Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 

586 (9th Cir. 1995) (where a plaintiff erroneously brings habeas claims in a civil rights action, 

the district court should “state that the prisoner’s claims must be addressed in a habeas petition, 

and dismiss the [civil rights] claims without prejudice”); id. at 585 (dismissals under Heck are 

“required to be without prejudice so that [the plaintiff] may reassert his claims if he ever

succeeds in invalidating his conviction”). (ECF No. 17 at 3.) On August 2, 2016, the Ninth 

Circuit issued the mandate. (ECF No. 18.)

This case has been reopened at the district court. In accordance with the Ninth Circuit’s 

order of June 6, 2016, this Court shall now dismiss Plaintiff’s claims in this action for failure to 

state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, without prejudice to filing a petition for writ of habeas 

corpus.

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

1. Plaintiff’s claims in this action are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim under 

42 U.S.C. § 1983, without prejudice to filing a petition for writ of habeas 

corpus; and

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 23, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00334-LJO-GSA Document 19 Filed 09/23/16 Page 2 of 2