Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-19-02786/USCOURTS-ca7-19-02786-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted February 10, 2020*

Decided February 11, 2020

Before

MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

AMY J. ST. EVE, Circuit Judge

No. 19-2786

HEON SEOK LEE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, et al. 

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 

Eastern Division.

No. 18 C 8294

Harry D. Leinenweber,

Judge.

O R D E R

Heon Seok Lee, a Korean national, was extradited to the United States, where a 

jury found him guilty of five counts of wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and three counts of 

fraudulent importation of goods into the United States, 18 U.S.C. § 545. He was 

sentenced to twelve months’ imprisonment. We affirmed Lee’s conviction and sentence 

on appeal. United States v. Lee, 937 F.3d 797 (7th Cir. 2019). In the meantime, Lee sued 

* We have agreed to decide this case without oral argument because the briefs 

and record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would 

not significantly aid the court. FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

Case: 19-2786 Document: 17 Filed: 02/11/2020 Pages: 2
No. 19-2786 Page 2

virtually everyone involved in his prosecution under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named 

Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). He challenged the 

constitutionality of his extradition, detention, and prosecution on multiple grounds, 

alleging that he was extradited and detained without probable cause, that prosecutors 

and other federal officials conspired to present a false indictment to the grand jury, 

enter fake evidence at trial, and create a false presentence investigation report, and that 

the court lacked jurisdiction to prosecute him. Lee sought billions of dollars in damages 

and the dismissal of his indictment. The district court determined that Lee’s claims 

necessarily implied the invalidity of his conviction or sentence and dismissed the 

complaint pursuant to Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486–87 (1994).1

On appeal, Lee’s sole argument is that Heck does not bar his claims because a

“void” or “null” judgment is different from an “invalid” judgment. But Lee’s attempt to 

distinguish “void” from “invalid” is meritless. A plaintiff cannot seek damages in a civil 

suit that would call into question the lawfulness of a criminal conviction or sentence

until that conviction or sentence has been reversed, expunged, invalidated, or otherwise 

called into question. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 489; Clemente v. Allen, 120 F.3d 703, 705 

(7th Cir. 1997) (applying Heck’s rationale to Bivens claims). Here, no judicial or executive 

officer has yet agreed that Lee’s conviction is “void,” so any claim for damages that 

would undermine it cannot proceed. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 485–87.

We note that Lee is no longer imprisoned, having been released in January 2019, 

but the Heck bar applies nonetheless. Savory v. Cannon, 947 F.3d 409, 420 (7th Cir. 2020) 

(en banc); see McDonough v. Smith, 139 S. Ct. 2149, 2159 (2019).

AFFIRMED

1 The district court initially dismissed Lee’s claims with prejudice. The court then 

granted in part a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), correctly 

amending the judgment to a dismissal without prejudice. See Johnson v. Rogers, 944 F.3d 

966, 968 (7th Cir. 2019).

Case: 19-2786 Document: 17 Filed: 02/11/2020 Pages: 2