Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01437/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01437-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHANEY LEAVONE NORVELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. ROBERTS, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:16-cv-1437 KJN P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. Plaintiff consented to proceed 

before the undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). By order filed October 11, 

2016, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 

(1994), because plaintiff challenged the rules violation report (“RVR”) incurred for obstructing a 

peace officer by refusing housing. (ECF No. 16.) Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint as 

required by such order. Rather, on October 24, 2016, plaintiff filed a letter to the undersigned, 

claiming that the court cannot dismiss a complaint about a corrections officer being corrupt. 

Plaintiff provided numerous exhibits, including a copy of the June 17, 2016 RVR. (ECF No. 21 

at 3-42.) As plaintiff was previously informed, he cannot pursue a damages claim in connection 

with the loss of credits resulting from the RVR until he demonstrates that the disciplinary action 

has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state 

tribunal, or called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. (ECF 

Case 2:16-cv-01437-KJN Document 22 Filed 11/17/16 Page 1 of 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

2

No. 16 at 4.) Plaintiff’s response makes clear that he continues to challenge the June 17, 2016 

rules violation report in this civil rights action. (ECF No. 21.) However, plaintiff did not 

demonstrate that the RVR has been reversed, expunged, or otherwise invalidated, as required 

under Heck. This court is bound to follow the Supreme Court’s ruling in Heck. Therefore, for

the reasons set forth in this court’s October 11, 2016 order, this action is dismissed without 

prejudice.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice. 

Dated: November 16, 2016

/norv1437.dsm

Case 2:16-cv-01437-KJN Document 22 Filed 11/17/16 Page 2 of 2