Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01508/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01508-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN R. SCHRUBB, Sr.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1508 LKK PAN P

vs.

EDWARD BONNER, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis relief pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed May 18, 2006, plaintiff was ordered to show cause why this

action should not be dismissed pursuant to Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). On June

16, 2006, plaintiff filed a response conceding his inability to satisfy the requirements of Heck. 

Plaintiff asks the court to hold this matter in abeyance until plaintiff exhausts his claims under

state and federal habeas review or, in the alternative, to dismiss this action without prejudice.

Under Heck, the court is required to determine whether a judgment in plaintiff’s

favor in this case would necessarily invalidate his conviction or sentence. Id. If it would, the

complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can show that the conviction or sentence has

been invalidated. As a general rules, dismissals pursuant to Heck v. Humphrey are without

prejudice. See Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 584 (9th Cir. 1995). 

Case 2:05-cv-01508-LKK -EFB Document 16 Filed 07/28/06 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

2

This court found that a judgment in plaintiff’s favor herein would implicate the

validity of plaintiff’s conviction. (May 18, 2006 Order at 2.) Plaintiff concedes he cannot

demonstrate that his conviction or sentence has been invalidated. Thus, this action must be

dismissed. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: July 27, 2006.

\001; schr1508.56

Case 2:05-cv-01508-LKK -EFB Document 16 Filed 07/28/06 Page 2 of 2